New guy in Colorado

[Ratchet]

Not sure why that one came out so weird.

[CT_Shooter]

Not sure why that one came out so weird.

It's very likely because of the aspect ratio of the image file. If an image doesn't conform to the common photo aspect ratio, the forum's software compensates by elongating or squeezing the image (one way or the other) into that ratio. Photos that are 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, etc. should display properly, whether in portrait or landscape orientation. At least, I think that's the issue.

[Shakey Jake]

Welcome to the forum!

[Mags]

Not sure why that one came out so weird.

It's very likely because of the aspect ratio of the image file. If an image doesn't conform to the common photo aspect ratio, the forum's software compensates by elongating or squeezing the image (one way or the other) into that ratio. Photos that are 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, etc. should display properly, whether in portrait or landscape orientation. At least, I think that's the issue.

I played around with this aspect ratio issue awhile back using the built-in FireFox webpage debugger. What's happening is the forum software is limiting the picture's display width but not the height. For example a picture 1024x900 is squeezed horizontally, while vertically it's not. When I used the debugger I was able, for debug purposes only, to turn off the horizontal limit. The pictures would then autosize to fit the web browser's window while also maintaining the correct aspect ratio of the picture. I don't know if this is something the forum owners (daytimedave and henry88 [correction:Sir Henry]) have any control over. There is some prior discussion on this in Hobbies/Photography sub forum that suggests they might have some control. If not, it's inherent in the forum software provided by phpBB. There is also a height limit, but for most pictures that have this problem the width limit is hit first.

Posting pictures taken by a cell phone are also an issue (upside down or rotated). See the Photo Testing topic on that. http://henryrifleforums.com/viewtopic.p ... 1&start=30

[RanchRoper]

Welcome from Alberta territory.

[The Wiz]

Welcome!!

[CT_Shooter]

I don't know if this is something the forum owners (daytimedave and henry88) have any control over.

FYI, Daytime Dave and Sir Henry own the forum.

Dave has attempted to address the problem, but has limited time and was unsuccessful. I have found, though, that using a 4:3 ratio and image size smaller than 800x600 is usually successful.

ratchets photo resized.jpg

[PT7]

How do you change the ratio in order to use a 4:3 ratio?

FYI, Daytime Dave and Sir Henry own the forum.

Dave has attempted to address the problem, but has limited time and was unsuccessful. I have found, though, that using a 4:3 ratio and image size smaller than 800x600 is usually successful.

ratchets photo resized.jpg

[ESquared]

Welcome to the forum from KC! Lots of great knowledge and experience here. You'll enjoy it!

[CT_Shooter]

How do you change the ratio in order to use a 4:3 ratio?

The standard 4:3 ratio produces images that have pixels counting 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, etc.

Rachet's photo was 1024 wide, but it was only 224 high. I created a new blank image in my graphics program that was 1024x768 and pasted his photo into it. Then, I resized the whole thing to 800x600 just because that size is best suited for web pages.

What I think happens is that the forum software compensates for the difference in ratio by stretching one side or the other; in this case, his 224 pixels became 768 pixels, making the image appear squashed.

However, I could be wrong. It just seems to me to be likely.