On Sun, 25 Nov 2018 14:51:25 -0600, SL <SerpentLord@Evil.Incarn8>
wrote:
>On Sun, 25 Nov 2018 08:45:28 -0500, Buck <Buck@Scanners.Inc> wrote:
>
><snipped>
>
>>My desktop monitor defaults to 1920x1080 resolution so I tend to use
>>it. With all the different sizes of monitors, laptops, tablets and
>>other devices, they each have there best resolution. I'm stuck on 1080
>>because it fills my entire screen. 1920x1200 and most any other
>>resolution have black band on the sides of the screen, which is
>>annoying to me. But I put up with it because not everyone, or should I
>>say everyone has their own preferences based on the equipment they are
>>using.
>>
>>I'm not a gamer so I can't relate to the issues there.
>>
>>Way back when I use to resize images to fit my screen. Now if I like
>>it I keep it regardless of the resolution/dimension. The way I see it
>>now, there will always be somebody that doesn't like something you've
>>uploaded. Some people will bitch about anything, including if they are
>>being hung with a new rope. Instead of fixing it to their needs they
>>would rather complain about it. My way of thinking is if it doesn't
>>fit your preferences then don't download or save it. I guess that's
>>just to simple for some people to understand.
>>
>>Sorry for the short rant!
>
> I wouldn't expect you to do anything less; I do the same thing
>too. It's hard or impossible to not crop too much to the point of it
>not looking good anymore on some though.
> That's another reason I'm putting Glamour Girls on hold. I
>started out doing it just for me. Then, knowing everyone else is
>using 1080 monitors, I started doing some for them. I'm doing it for
>two monitors, you know, so that's threee sizes. Some of the guys know
>I'm putting the majority of the sets in this group so...what's the
>point? I did 99% of those with Irfanview - easy-peasy.
> Because of how things are right now, and it could change, 2/3
>of what I can get fall into the realm of this group. One of the
>gentlemen in .bh steered me here...and the rest is History.
> 1080 has become the norm whether I like it or not. I'm not
>complaining about the rope, my friend. In fact, I suspect more and
>more software, images and the like will cease supporting 16:10. It's
>extra work now for them too, with little payback.
> Ah, well, things are what they are. So it goes.
My 'selfish' opinion is that images should not be resized (read
reduced in quality), unless marked so. It is dissapointing to
download a set, see the cover shot say 21MP, and find the set <2MP. It
doesn't look good on moderns card/monitor combo's.
Whenever I upload such sets, I try to make it clear they are not as
advertised by making the res clear in the indexes/coversheets.
The resizing problem does not seem to be an issue in EarlMiller, but
is rampant on other groups.I feel a Hegre 80MP post coming on.....
|
|
')){kind=link}