# Upload probs...



## marmelmm (Nov 27, 2007)

FYI, I'm trying to upload ahrts and repeatedly getting a blank page after I browse for the image and hitting "Next".  Even reloading gives no result.

I daresay this is owing to some sort of overload from EVERYONE trying to upload ahrts at once, so I'll try again later.  

Just a heads-up.

Good to see the site back up again!  (happydance)

-MMM-


----------



## marmelmm (Nov 27, 2007)

marmelmm said:
			
		

> FYI, I'm trying to upload ahrts and repeatedly getting a blank page after I browse for the image and hitting "Next".  Even reloading gives no result.
> 
> I daresay this is owing to some sort of overload from EVERYONE trying to upload ahrts at once, so I'll try again later.
> 
> ...



Update:  Seems to be a filesize issue.  Once I reduced the size of the file, it uploaded fine.  Someone might wanna make a note on the upload page, though...


----------



## yak (Nov 27, 2007)

What was the filesize of what you were trying to upload?


----------



## yak (Nov 27, 2007)

Also, there _is a mention, right there on page_, that the max filesize is 10mbyte. I don't know how you've missed it


----------



## marmelmm (Nov 27, 2007)

yak said:
			
		

> Also, there _is a mention, right there on page_, that the max filesize is 10mbyte. I don't know how you've missed it



Well, that was the odd part.  The original size was 1.8 megs, then reduced to 600 k, neither of which worked.  What I wound up doing was reducing the dimensions down from about 3000 x 2000 to 768 x 512 or so, and then it uploaded OK.  So, there may be some dimensional limitations; if so, you may want to mention that on the upload pages...


----------



## yak (Nov 27, 2007)

The server is not a graphical powerhouse station with eight CPUs and a dosen of gigs of RAM..

You know very well the maximum size of the image FA accepts is within the 1280x1280 limit. Why were you even trying to upload your mc. large huge image anyway? All it does is eat away server resources while resizing it, and i'm glad i kept them as `low` as this, so it would fail with an error instead of even try to resize an image the size of a niagara waterfall.

Come on guys, stop raping the servers, it's not nice when you know it's not the proper way to use them.


----------



## marmelmm (Nov 27, 2007)

yak said:
			
		

> The server is not a graphical powerhouse station with eight CPUs and a dosen of gigs of RAM..



Nope, you guys just make it look that way.  



			
				yak said:
			
		

> You know very well the maximum size of the image FA accepts is within the 1280x1280 limit. Why were you even trying to upload your mc. large huge image anyway? All it does is eat away server resources while resizing it, and i'm glad i kept them as `low` as this, so it would fail with an error instead of even try to resize an image the size of a niagara waterfall.
> 
> Come on guys, stop raping the servers, it's not nice when you know it's not the proper way to use them.



Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

I must plead ignorance of the 1280 x 1280 limit, and I apologize for my error and my inadvertant misuse of server resources.  I will try to do better in future.

In mitigation, I would like the Court to take into account the fact that my graphics viewers automatically resize images while not making the actual size immediately apparent.  

May I respectfully request that the 1280 x 1280 limit be added to the note about the 10 mb limit?

Thanks, and keep up the superlative work!  

-MMM-


----------



## CaribbeanFox (Nov 27, 2007)

I agree, the 1280x1280 image size limit should be added to the same section of text as the 10MB limit.  I knew there was a image size limit simply because I had run across it -- somewhere.  But yeah it would be really helpful to have the max dimensions on display every time we upload because we're a forgetful bunch.


----------



## yak (Nov 27, 2007)

Hmm, perhaps i was wrong for coming off _this_ hostile in my response, for that i ask my apologies.
Indeed there is no notice of the maximum submission dimentions on any steps of the upload process, and i am going to ad them right now.


----------



## yak (Nov 27, 2007)

Templates updated with additonal information.


----------



## marmelmm (Nov 27, 2007)

yak said:
			
		

> Templates updated with additonal information.



Hooray!  :lol:

Good show!

-MMM-


----------



## marmelmm (Nov 27, 2007)

yak said:
			
		

> Hmm, perhaps i was wrong for coming off _this_ hostile in my response, for that i ask my apologies.



Don't sweat it.  With all you've been going through, you're entitled.



			
				yak said:
			
		

> Indeed there is no notice of the maximum submission dimentions on any steps of the upload process, and i am going to ad them right now.



(goes and looks) Perfect!  Just the information needed.  Bravo!  

-MMM-


----------



## Stratelier (Nov 28, 2007)

> Why were you even trying to upload your [3000 x 2000] image anyway?



That's nothing, I work as a staff member on a site with a pre-screening process where we regularly refute submissions that are greater than about 1500px.  I can't count the number of rejections of pieces clocking in at the 2000, 3000, or 4000 pixel range, and I've actually seen a few submission attempts in the 6,000 and 7,000 pixel range.  Proves the level of computer- and scanner- literacy you're dealing with when people scan their five-minute pencil doodles at 1200dpi and then try to upload it the same.

And then there's the people who upload BMP's....


----------



## CK_318 (Jan 9, 2008)

i'm still having a submission problem, i'm trying to resubmit a piece of art that was titled My Sally Acorn that i deleted because of this problem. i was trying submit the smaller version, but i kept getting that blank screen. and the image is in jpeg format and well within the size limitations. its size is 1.63 MB and its resolution is 558x768
its starting to get a bit annoying. 

thank you for any other explanation.


----------



## yak (Jan 9, 2008)

558x768 jpeg image that is 1.63 megabytes in size? That's roughly 11 times more in filesize then really necessary. Could you consider optimizing the image before trying to upload it again?


----------



## CK_318 (Jan 9, 2008)

yak said:
			
		

> 558x768 jpeg image that is 1.63 megabytes in size? That's roughly 11 times more in filesize then really necessary. Could you consider optimizing the image before trying to upload it again?



i would if i knew exactly how too. this one has been scaled down from the original size of over 3000pixels.

the one i had up before was over 1700 pixels tall. thats why i decided to put up the smaller one so it would fit on everyones screen more easily.


----------



## Stratelier (Jan 9, 2008)

> 558x768 jpeg image that is 1.63 megabytes in size? That's roughly 11 times more in filesize then really necessary. Could you consider optimizing the image before trying to upload it again?


What yak is trying to say, a 600x800 or smaller JPEG should barely weigh in at 200~300kb, let alone over a meg.  Check your compression and chroma subsampling options.


----------



## yak (Jan 9, 2008)

CK_318 said:
			
		

> yak said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you're using Photoshop, under the "File" menu, there is the "Save for web" option, or in older version something like "Save optimized" or similar, anyway, use that to save the file before uploading  it on FA.  Overall, JPEG images of that size even with the 100% quality, should never exceed 300-400kbytes. 1.63Mbytes is seriously an overkill.

And if you're not using photoshop, well, i dunno. Open it in mspaint or something (?) and just save it again from there. Though quality loss may occur, the filesize should drop considerably.


----------



## Ceceil Felias (Jan 9, 2008)

You know what I'm betting?

His picture's likely a bitmap renamed to a JPEG, which is part of the reason why it won't upload.


----------



## CK_318 (Jan 10, 2008)

Ceceil Felias said:
			
		

> You know what I'm betting?
> 
> His picture's likely a bitmap renamed to a JPEG, which is part of the reason why it won't upload.



yep it sure was. so i'm thinking i'm going to have to re scan it in but this time as a jpeg?

but it did work the first time around, so i dunno whats going on ?


----------



## yak (Jan 11, 2008)

ugh....


----------

