Image Uploads And Compression

[+dogbreathcanada]

Sometime in the past few months, the image uploads here on GC.com have changed.

 

On my cache pages I like to create a graphical header, simply to make the page look a little more appealing.

 

Here is one of the headers I recently created. This is the original image before uploading to the GC.com servers:

 

Here is what that image looks like after it was uploaded to GC.com:

 

As you can see, the GC.com image uploading process has recompressed the image (by 30%). Compression artifacts are plainly visible (especially in the small text and the colour change in the white text). It gives the image a very muddy quality, not too mention that it gives the impression that I don't know how to properly compress JPEGs.

 

This recompression wasn't always the case. As late as a few months back, as long as an image was less than 600 pixels wide and 125KB in size, the GC.com uploading process would not "touch" an image.

 

Here is a header from one of my older caches:

Notice that this image looks very much like the original image above. A lack of noticeable compression artifacts.

 

My BIG question is "Why has the image uploading process changed?" Is there a sudden premium on storage on the image servers? Does this have anything to do with Waymarking? (I would hope not).

 

Could any GC staff answer this? As a paying member of GC.com, I'm disappointed with this change. I consider it a downgrade in a feature I've come to rely on when creating my cache pages.

 

Thanks.

[+dogbreathcanada]

I'd appreciate some sort of answer from TPTB concerning why image uploading was changed, downgraded in essence.

[+Gorak]

Host your images on your own server then you won't have to stress over what amounts to extremely minor image degradation. The other advantage is that you'll no longer be giving GC the rights to use your images for other purposes as they see fit.

[+dogbreathcanada]

Host your images on your own server then you won't have to stress over what amounts to extremely minor image degradation. The other advantage is that you'll no longer be giving GC the rights to use your images for other purposes as they see fit.

I could host my images elsewhere ... but I am paying for this service after all. I think, at the very least, I'm entitled to an answer concerning why the image upload service was degraded.

 

Compression artifacts may not bother you, but they do bother me. Perhaps I just have better eyesight? Or a more focused attention to detail? I find the compression artifacting to be glaring and off-putting, rather than simply a minor inconsistency.

[+Gorak]

Compression artifacts may not bother you, but they do bother me. Perhaps I just have better eyesight? Or a more focused attention to detail? I find the compression artifacting to be glaring and off-putting, rather than simply a minor inconsistency.

In a side by side comparison the compression artifacts are certainly noticable but I doubt anyone would notice otherwise. Keep in mind that it is the cache page that people are coming to see. Graphics are merely window dressing that barely get a second look unless the image is required to actually find the cache.

 

BTW - there is no need to be insulting about it. I was merely offering up a workaround for you in view of the lack of response you are receiving from TPTB. I should have known better. No wonder they're not responding to you....

[Jeremy]

I could host my images elsewhere ... but I am paying for this service after all. I think, at the very least, I'm entitled to an answer concerning why the image upload service was degraded.

The issue has to do with the fact that during some coding changes there was a block of code that was disabled that ignored any file resizing of images that were below 125k and a certain size. I'll have to check but I believe that has been corrected in the past day.

 

Image uploading is not a Premium Member feature that you pay for, but a free service for any accounts on the web site. You are probably confusing us with Flickr. Image uploads are a courtesy feature on the web site.

[Jeremy]

On second review, the code will not be released until Monday since we have some additional features that still need to be adequately tested before they are posted to the web site.

[+dogbreathcanada]

On second review, the code will not be released until Monday since we have some additional features that still need to be adequately tested before they are posted to the web site.

Thanks for the answer and update, Jeremy. Much appreciated.