Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/ImageResizeBot: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:27, 17 March 2008

Revision as of 21:31, 17 March 2008

Line 34:

**** To my other point, I am just not sure thumbnail size is the optimal size to choose. It may be a good default setting, but I think there may be some other heuristics for specific image types (determined by the licensing template) that might be useful. - [[User:AWeenieMan|AWeenieMan]] ([[User talk:AWeenieMan|talk]]) 20:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

*****The requested list is at [[User:ImageResizeBot/List1]]. Its long, but all the information is there. The image that would be resized, and the image's current size. —— '''[[user:Eagle 101|<font color="navy">Eagle</font><font color="red">101]]'''</font>^{[[user_talk:Eagle 101|Need help?]]} 20:20, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

****** Excellent, thank you. Alright, well, there does appear to be many ridiculously sized images on that list, so I definitely see the need. (Asking new question below). -&nbsp;[[User:AWeenieMan|AWeenieMan]]&nbsp;([[User talk:AWeenieMan|talk]]) 21:31, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

*** (ec) Musing on the image size issue. I'm uncertain how the Mediawiki software handles image sizing for display on monitors. But I know that available monitor resolutions are growing over time. Will there come a point where monitor resolutions will have grown to a size that a 600x600 image is a standard size thumbnail? If so, we'll want large images again then. I know current top of the line digital monitors display by default in a resolution that is a multiple of the best I can achieve on my home CRT monitor, and it gets a multiple of the monitor resolutions available when I started using computers (an [[Apple II]]). On the other hand, I don't know of a [[Moore's Law]] for monitor resolutions, but our article says it applies to digital camera resolutions. [[User:GRBerry|GRBerry]] 20:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

****Well... you have to remember we are dealing with non-free images here. By that I mean, the goal is not super high resolution here, just what is currently needed. :S Discuss :) There is a reason we are asked to keep non-free images small, we really don't need to display much larger then the size required by the article currently. ''P.S. I can explain to you how mediawiki handles it, but I don't want to go too far off topic, to put it short, it stores thumbnails that are displayed on the article, and stores a full sized version if someone clicks the image. For non-free images we only need the thumbnail. These are usually kept fairly small due to bandwidth usage. You really don't want to load 10 1MB images to read an article :)'' —— '''[[user:Eagle 101|<font color="navy">Eagle</font><font color="red">101]]'''</font>^{[[user_talk:Eagle 101|Need help?]]} 20:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

* Question: What do you think about an image such as [[:Image:Cannibalised.jpg]]? As it stands, it is just above your mark (600 × 601) (I agree, it's much too big in its current state), but shrinking it to thumbnail size makes it just below your mark (599 × 600), which seems like a minor difference. And then there are images like [[:Image:Aroundtheworld.jpg]] where the thumbnail seems to be the full size of the image. These are really just test cases to me, as I am just wondering how you plan on handling them (not an argument to ignore them in any way). -&nbsp;[[User:AWeenieMan|AWeenieMan]]&nbsp;([[User talk:AWeenieMan|talk]]) 21:31, 17 March 2008 (UTC)