Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Comments on Allow including larger images

Post

Allow including larger images

+3
−4

Many images and screenshots captured today, are larger than 2 MB, the max allowed size on Codidact. This means users will regularly run into a barrier when attempting to upload images to their posts (or profile). Just now, I wanted to create a new post, which would benefit from some screenshots, however, that process was more complicated than it should have to be, because I was denied uploading the screenshots, as they were too large. I can still upload them, but I'll have to go compress them first. Codidact should accept images with a larger file size more reasonable today.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

4 comment threads

Also a UX and accessibility issue (1 comment)
Realism about compression (3 comments)
Server Side is MUCH Better (7 comments)
Implementation (1 comment)
Realism about compression
Karl Knechtel‭ wrote about 1 year ago · edited about 1 year ago

A 1080p display is 1920x1080 pixels; at 32-bit colour it takes almost 8 megabytes to store that. Many contemporary displays have better resolution than that, and cameras on even fairly outdated phones can take pictures at much higher resolution. If an image is merely "larger than 2 MB", that could easily represent something that is already compressed and would not benefit from further attempts at compression. Of course, JPG is lossy and offers a size-quality tradeoff, but it doesn't seem like the greatest idea to make that decision for the user silently.

Aside from that, I would argue that a user who has such a large image and does not understand anything about how to reduce the file size, should probably be discouraged from trying to upload it. Especially on Software, where such an image would most likely be a phone picture of a computer screen showing code - which is highly sub-optimal.

Antares‭ wrote 3 months ago · edited 3 months ago

I object: Never discourage a user from using your site. If you do, you have a site for yourself all alone very soon or not growing at all.

In terms of a more general UX advise: If there are size restrictions there should probably be a function (a button) to automatically resize and compress an image to fit that constraint. That is totally in the spirit of "ease-of-use".

On terms of humanity: Arguing that people should be excluded because they lack a certain type of skill, is also not in agreement of a code of conduct that aims on integrating people with disabilities (in the broader sense). You know, if you enforce alt-tags on images for those who have problems discerning them, it makes sense helping those who do not know that a screenshot has a certain file size or how to use gimp to resize them.

Antares‭ Karl wasn't arguing for the exclusion of people, he was arguing that users should be demanded to think more thoroughly about uploading specifically an image.

I do not agree with him that simply hard-blocking people because of image size is the correct way to do it. In case the user did think it through, yet wants to proceed, they can't. Additionally, using the file size to decide whether or not to demand more thought from the user, is the wrong metric.