Now all uploaded images on MS are resized automatically - you will notice the rules are changed from strict "150x150" to "150x150 or more", which means you can upload any image bigger than 150x150 and it will be resized to the required format. This should make things easier for our contributors.

The changes affect uploaded pictures for:

- Avatars (jpg only)
- Signature pictures (jpg only)
- Bands
- Albums
- Videos
- Logos
- Musicians
- News
- Events
- Locations
- Articles
- Reviews
- Interviews
- Funny stuff

Cool. Good Job!

This is awesome. Saves a lot of time working with pictures. Now the only thing we have to do is cutting away borders and irrelevant stuff

and what if i upload a 200x300 image? it will be 150x150 and deformed or 100x150?

Written by Janne on 14.09.2008 at 21:35

and what if i upload a 200x300 image? it will be 150x150 and deformed or 100x150?

It will be 150x150 - so yes, try to at least keep the proportions. I considered automatic cropping too, but it might, for example, accidentally cut a couple of bandmembers from a band photo

Keep in mind that resizing like this will still probably look worse than if you do it by yourself in Photoshop since Photoshop has various algorithms that make resizing smoother. Therefore, it is still better to do it yourself, although this is also a great feature!

Well that definitely will make contributing easier. I always hated the image resizing part. Thanks to that I developed a pretty quick image-resizing-ability by now.

Written by jupitreas on 14.09.2008 at 21:51

Keep in mind that resizing like this will still probably look worse than if you do it by yourself in Photoshop since Photoshop has various algorithms that make resizing smoother. Therefore, it is still better to do it yourself, although this is also a great feature!

Exactly my thoughts. Although this will make things easier for some people, I will keep to resizing myself - it only takes five seconds anyway with a program like IrfanView.

so the only thing i must do is to find a picture that has a shape of square and don't need to care about the size. it can be 800x800 or 2431x2431, right?

Written by Baz Anderson on 14.09.2008 at 22:04

Written by jupitreas on 14.09.2008 at 21:51

Keep in mind that resizing like this will still probably look worse than if you do it by yourself in Photoshop since Photoshop has various algorithms that make resizing smoother. Therefore, it is still better to do it yourself, although this is also a great feature!

Exactly my thoughts. Although this will make things easier for some people, I will keep to resizing myself - it only takes five seconds anyway with a program like IrfanView.

It would be good to know if this nice feature makes any difference or not. Because if it does then I guess I'll stick with resizing pictures myself too even if I have to fight against my laziness every time.

Written by Janne on 14.09.2008 at 22:14

so the only thing i must do is to find a picture that has a shape of square and don't need to care about the size. it can be 800x800 or 2431x2431, right?

yes

this is absolutely awesome Ivan!
i've always really hated having to resize all the images

how is this with the image size in KB? if i upload an image with a size of 150KB for an albumcover, will the site tell me that the file is too big?

thanx dudes! this is awesome!

Lets do a quick test.

Version resized by MS.


Version resized by Photoshop.


As you can see, the PS version is slightly sharper and also almost half the size as the MS version.
Nevertheless, it is obvious that the MS resizing is still very good and nothing to complain about. I would say go ahead and use the automatic resizing and only fall back on Photoshop if the image looks really bad in a specific case.

Written by jupitreas on 14.09.2008 at 22:26

Lets do a quick test.

Version resized by MS.


Version resized by Photoshop.


As you can see, the PS version is slightly sharper and also almost half the size as the MS version.
Nevertheless, it is obvious that the MS resizing is still very good and nothing to complain about. I would say go ahead and use the automatic resizing and only fall back on Photoshop if the image looks really bad in a specific case.

there's not too much difference between them. the 1 made by MS is OK imo.

Good job, Ivan!

Cool now i can easely edd albums and bands , otherwise Baraley edd all images of albums , thank's to her
Realy good , it makes album edding and band pic edding more easier for me
Thank's Ivan

Written by Bas on 14.09.2008 at 22:22

this is absolutely awesome Ivan!
i've always really hated having to resize all the images

how is this with the image size in KB? if i upload an image with a size of 150KB for an albumcover, will the site tell me that the file is too big?

It's also resized when the filesize limit is exceeded, even if the image dimensions are correct.

This is much better. Before I had a hard time resizing images to the correct size most of the time when I did it wouldn't accept the pic because the height or width wasn't 100kb.

Written by ß on 14.09.2008 at 23:46

This is much better. Before I had a hard time resizing images to the correct size most of the time when I did it wouldn't accept the pic because the height or width wasn't 100kb.

It was hard I spend 2 hours resize my oban pic, then I ask Baraley and WWS and tahy helped me
It was realy hard,

Written by Ivan on 14.09.2008 at 23:22

It's also resized when the filesize limit is exceeded, even if the image dimensions are correct.

excellent!

nice.

This is a neat feature, but I'll still stick to Photoshop, as you can see from Jupi's test, photoshop's image is sharper and overall looks better.

nice, its always annoying having to resize things to fit in... but not anymore

Is there any hint as to at which filesize for example Band Logos are resized? We are told to look out for jpeg fragments and stuff before uploading but it seems the page now adds those fragments on itself.
Yesterday I added this new kreator logo I made in photoshop:


As you can see it's crystal clear and sharp. But the site did this to it:


ugly fragments all over the place.

Call me videophile but imho this doesn't suit the clean, tidy look of MS. With album covers that might be alright, they are small and their purpose is to give an impression on what to look out for in stores. But Band Logos? Come on, they are the first thing that welcomes you when you open a bands biography.
So how small do I have to keep these files to avoid this?

Written by corrupt on 15.09.2008 at 14:11

Is there any hint as to at which filesize for example Band Logos are resized? We are told to look out for jpeg fragments and stuff before uploading but it seems the page now adds those fragments on itself.

...

ugly fragments all over the place.

Call me videophile but imho this doesn't suit the clean, tidy look of MS. With album covers that might be alright, they are small and their purpose is to give an impression on what to look out for in stores. But Band Logos? Come on, they are the first thing that welcomes you when you open a bands biography.
So how small do I have to keep these files to avoid this?

It's 50Kb for logos, yours almost made it... For 150x150 pics it's around 25Kb and for 100x100 it's 12Kb.

Written by Ivan on 15.09.2008 at 14:21

It's 50Kb for logos, yours almost made it...

It should have. It's exactly 49590 bytes. Even divided by 1k and rounded that's still 50Kb. But I'll try that again, I cropped bit of the black border and it's ~38Kb now.
Also, if the goal is to reach a filesize below 50k, maybe you can extend your code to be less aggressive with logos. The Kreator logo was scaled down to a size of ~12Kb.

Written by corrupt on 15.09.2008 at 15:07

Also, if the goal is to reach a filesize below 50k, maybe you can extend your code to be less aggressive with logos. The Kreator logo was scaled down to a size of ~12Kb.

I already have. The resized logo quality was 90, now it's 100 - so even if it's resized, there should be less jpeg artefacts.

Cool. Thank you.

Oh man, that makes everything so much easier.