What about proposing slightly different rules about the maximum picture
size for IRTC stills ?
Currently, the maximum size is 800x600. All images having a larger
heigth or width are automatically rejected. For vertical images, the FAQ
says that one could submit a rotated picture instead, something I don't
find very practical.
IMHO, this rule could be changed a little, so that images with other
ratios than 4/3 could be accepted without losing too much pixels in the
process. Presently, a 600 x 800 image must be resized to 450 x 600 to
obey the rule (-45% of the picture surface !).

I propose that the rule be changed as follows :

- Images should contain less than 480000 pixels

This would allow for 800x600, 600x800 and many other formats. A 16/9
picture would fit in a 912 x 513 frame and so on. This wouldn't change
the image size in kb.

What do you think, and how would it be a problem for the IRTC Admins ?

Gilles Tran

Post a reply to this message

I thought about this, too. The problem is that the IRTC admins use
scripts to make thumbs of the original images for the preview page. I
fear that they would have to make them more flexible and the any other
format might kill their page formatting. Otherwise I would really
appreciate to use a 600*800 picture.

Marc

-- 
Marc Schimmler

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran <tra### [at] inapginrafr> wrote:
: I propose that the rule be changed as follows :

: - Images should contain less than 480000 pixels

  Then a 800x600 picture would break the rule since it hasn't less than
480000 pixels.
  I think that you meant "480000 pixels or less"?-)

  I think that there should also be a limit for the aspect ratio. For example
the aspect ratio of the image should be between 4:1 and 1:4.
  This is to avoid some funny guys to send a 1x480000 sized image.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

my next submission is likely to be an odd ratio - however, I can see many
problems with large width/height pics. The main one is that many users run
their monitors at 800*600.

 What I was going to do was add a bottom and top border and add a view
alternative views and details of the pic.

This would be post-processing, but of a sort that leaves the main image
unaffected - would this be okay? (or would people not know whether they were
voting on the central image or the montage).

If so, this could be a nice way not to lose out when using odd ratios.

Post a reply to this message

> I thought about this, too. The problem is that the IRTC admins use
> scripts to make thumbs of the original images for the preview page. I
> fear that they would have to make them more flexible and the any other
> format might kill their page formatting. Otherwise I would really
> appreciate to use a 600*800 picture.

I don't know if they use a script to produce the thumbs, but they have
mentioned on the list in previous discussions that using a different
aspect ratio would screw up the viewing page.Some time ago I recall asking
if a 600*800 image would be allowed and almost got my head bit off by the
last person that asked the question.

-Mike

Post a reply to this message

Tom Melly wrote in message <3879fd32@news.povray.org>...
>my next submission is likely to be an odd ratio - however, I can see many
>problems with large width/height pics. The main one is that many users run
>their monitors at 800*600.


Exactly.  My monitor doesn't work well at resolutions higher than 800x600,
so I would have a choice of trying to judge an image in bits and pieces, or
trying to judge a very fuzzy image.

> What I was going to do was add a bottom and top border and add a view
>alternative views and details of the pic.
>
>This would be post-processing, but of a sort that leaves the main image
>unaffected - would this be okay? (or would people not know whether they
were
>voting on the central image or the montage).


This sort of post-processing can be done internally in POV-Ray using image
maps.

Mark

Post a reply to this message

> > What I was going to do was add a bottom and top border and add a view
> >alternative views and details of the pic.
> >
> >This would be post-processing, but of a sort that leaves the main image
> >unaffected - would this be okay? (or would people not know whether they
> were
> >voting on the central image or the montage).
>
>
> This sort of post-processing can be done internally in POV-Ray using image
> maps.
>
> Mark
>

Yes, but for obvious reasons I would rather post the source to the main
image rather than the the montage!

Post a reply to this message