Paul D Posted May 16, 2006 Report Share Posted May 16, 2006 Checked our bandwidth usage and was a little shocked. ( we have used 60% of our monthly allowance already ), so found the cause which was the large piccie of Mark B with his Alderney haul. I have shrunk the picture down and introduced a posting size limit of 512K ( which is ample for a decent photo ). If we get nearer out monthly limit then will need to put further restrictions but should be OK for now. PS; Thanks Rich for making me check it ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomBettle Posted May 16, 2006 Report Share Posted May 16, 2006 Sorry Paul! 6.3MB of Nikon Digital SLR camera's fault, not mine.... honest! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul D Posted May 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 16, 2006 Tom, No problem - the second and third spots were held by mine and my friend's Tope pictures, so just as guilty myself ( although 11% of the bandwidth was used by the one picture ! ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 I can hear Bessant now boasting about how his big fish took the site down Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swainiac Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 PJ, its amazing how even a tiny fish looks big on camera, did you see my plaice in Sea Dangler?? Looked positively large!!! Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncan Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 did you see my plaice in Sea Dangler nope - can't have been that big..................... clearly instead of a single size limit on photo pixels we should have one weighted (hehehe) to fish size.............thus a 60lb conger could have 600 x 400, a 40lb tope 500 x 300 16lb undulate 300 x 150 and Badger's plaice..........a deserving 60 x 40 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swainiac Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 I'm so glad I logged on tonight after work..........Slam Dunc's gems make I larrrrrrrfffff <gg> Rich.....sorry Badger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coddy Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 PJ, its amazing how even a tiny fish looks big on camera, did you see my plaice in Sea Dangler?? Looked positively large!!! Rich Nope as I don't buy that mag but it is in BFM Coddy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack Posted May 18, 2006 Report Share Posted May 18, 2006 Paul,you and the others now know why there are no pictures of my fish on the site. It's such a bind having to keep the size of fish caught, down to a proportion that can be contained in a photo that can be reduced enough to print Seriously 'though,some sights have a little built in magnifying glass [ one of our chaps gave me the details,and i use it often on my PC.] perhaps one of these would make my catches look better ,on screen....jack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.