New Forum bugs/feature requests/dislikes etc

[SamQ aka Ah! Q!]

Thank you for the clarifications Alasdair.

 

[Mike]

Alasdair, is there an optimum pixel (or Byte) size for images for the software to handle, for instance my keyboard images above have been expanded to full page (on my system anyway) is this the case regardless of source? it seems unnecessary in your face for such in this instance.

The maximum size of uploaded images is set in the AdminCP by file size, pixel dimensions, or both. In the case of your two keyboard images, the XenForo software actually compressed them for display (on my Mac laptop). The first image is 1200 x 1072 pixels and was resized to 1018 x 909 to fit the browser window and my display. The second image is 1200 x 875 pixels and was resized to 1018 x 742 to fit my display. When images are scaled down, clicking on them will open them up in the image viewer and allow viewing at full size. I'll verify this later, but I think if I view them on my iMac with a larger display, they will likely be displayed without compression.

In the case of these two images, the scaling factor was about 85 percent. Had your images been larger, such as 2400 x 2000, they would have been scaled appropriately to fit my display and the scaling factor would have been lower, such as 40 percent. However, clicking on the image will open it in full size so I can view as much as I can with scrolling.

When I'm uploading images (as opposed to linking from my image hosting service) where resolution isn't important, I will resize them so the largest dimension is about 768 pixels. I use the Preview app on the Mac for simple size, cropping, rotating, and annotation edits, and Windows has a similar image editor.

 

[akirk]

our current settings are a max. of 1200px in either direction and a max file size of 1mb
what I am intrigued by is the algorithm used to scale down according to responsive screen sizes, because some photos seem to have come in much larger than others…

 

[Mike]

The XF developers are very bright and were the vBulletin v3.x developers before they left to start their own company. It's no coincidence that vB v3.x was the last version with robust security.

I don't pretend to understand the platform response, but am glad it works well.

Here are three examples from my previous job linked from my image hosting service with the sizes above each image. The first image is 3.2MB, but because it is not hosted on the WH2 server, the image size limitations don't apply, only the URLs per message (post).

2387 x 1910

1200 x 960

562 x 540

 

[akirk]

thank you, an interesting comparison…
what do folks think about photo sizes, do we just use photos to give the scene or drill into them for detail? I don’t think we want to above 1200px, but we could go down to 8-900px if that were still big enough… a photo that is too big can be as difficult to take in as a small photo…

 

[Mike G]

I have always resized mine to 1000 pixels as the max dim. If any change retrospectively affected photos already posted, there'd be 7or 8000 photos of mine that would need some work.

I think we do need detail. People zoom in and look quite closely at some aspects of some photos. But frankly, if you can't see it in 1200 pixels you aren't going to see it at all.

 

[AJB Temple]

That is an interesting comparison Mike (from Germany). Tend to agree with Mike G here that people will often zoom in to see detail. Surely one of the advantages of XF is that you can just drag and drop without doing any resizing, and the XF software will conform the image to whatever the main admin has set as hosting parameters? For forum use, I tend to do no processing whatsoever (no AI, no crop, no resizing or rotating, no sharpening, no exposure adjustment etc) - it comes straight off iPhone to desktop and then gets dragged and dropped. When testing, Mark and I established that CR2 files will not load on XF: they need to be passed through a converter, which was no shock as raw files are all huge. AVIF files would not load either, which surprised me a bit as I think this format will get more common as it allows high compression but (allegedly) less loss of detail than compressed JPEG.

 

[CHJ]

EXIF Data

Is the above option implemented on the board to remove personal location information in images from the public view.

The previous comment about drag and drop brought it to mind.

 

[akirk]

EXIF Data

Is the above option implemented on the board to remove personal location information in images from the public view.

The previous comment about drag and drop brought it to mind.

No it is not implemented - for several reasons:
- It is not specifically a built in part of Xenforo
- the addons listed in that thread are either for older versions of Xenforo (so we can't use them) or have specifically noted issues (such as making images considerably bigger) which we would prefer to avoid...
- some EXIF data is good to retain - e.g. Author / copyright etc.

The way that Xenforo works is:
- it uses EXIF data to rotate images - so all the angst on the previous forum may return if you strip out all EXIF data before uploading an image - if the orientation is not written into the EXIF, then the forum software can't read it and hey presto we are back to upside down photos!
- if the image uploaded is within the forum settings (max 1200px wide / 1200px height / 1mb file size) then the file is uploaded exactly as is including any extant EXIF data
- if the image uploaded is bigger than the forum settings then the xenforo software will re-size it and as a part of that process the EXIF data is removed
- if the image is uploaded to the forum using the gallery module, then no EXIF data is removed...

So there is no simple forum based solution - always upload images above 1200px if you want to have the EXIF data removed automatically - or strip it out before uploading (but please leave in orientation data!) or like me - just don't worry about it...

Sorry that there is no easy answer on this - the ideal would be an option in the admin to set forum wide / per sub-forum which EXIF data to keep or remove, but it doesn't seem to exist in a robust format currently...

 

[AndyT]

So the position is that anyone who doesn't want info such as location to be included with their photos can turn it off in the settings on their phone/camera. Or remove it afterwards, before uploading. Or not worry.

Seems fine to me.

 

[AJB Temple]

Not totally correct Andy. If for example you are using Photos on a Mac as you main photo library, you can select one or more photos and choose "no location" and the location will then no appear in the drag and drop version, but you need to be a bit careful as it has not actually removed the location from the exif data on the original file. So if that original file is transferred somewhere, say by USB to a different storage location or editing software, the location data (and everything else) is intact. Photos as an OSX app is not especially editable for Metadata/ Typical of Apple. No idea about other operating systems. Not sure about iPhone settings either - if I turn off location tracking in mine, it definitely does not stop the camera app from recording it in the metadata.

 

[akirk]

I think that every OS / computer / phone has its own quirks... for example in Windows 11 if you right-click and select properties, there is an option under the Details tab to remove properties and personal information - makes it very easy... other systems are less easy...

if we can easily add the function here we will, but at present it doesn't look simple and I am loathe to write bespoke code / do anything which will hinder upgrades and keeping the core forum code robust... Ultimately, it is something that users can control, so one to park back in the user's control unless the forum software changes in the future...

 

[TrimTheKing]

This is easy to test, upload a photo and use the browser to inspect the pic. Most browsers have a feature to show any EXIF data that still exists.

 

[CHJ]

............

The way that Xenforo works is:
- it uses EXIF data to rotate images - so all the angst on the previous forum may return if you strip out all EXIF data before uploading an image - if the orientation is not written into the EXIF, then the forum software can't read it and hey presto we are back to upside down photos!
- if the image uploaded is within the forum settings (max 1200px wide / 1200px height / 1mb file size) then the file is uploaded exactly as is including any extant EXIF data
- if the image uploaded is bigger than the forum settings then the xenforo software will re-size it and as a part of that process the EXIF data is removed
- if the image is uploaded to the forum using the gallery module, then no EXIF data is removed...
..................

Thank you for the detailed explanation, I personally orientate and strip EXIF data by default (just my way of working) 99% of the time but knowing the info. re- forum settings is available to a forum search if the need arises means it can be forgotten along with the majority of recent musings.

I've been very conscious over the years how many folks post images to social media complete with precise location of their most valuable treasures, vehicles, workshops etc.

 

[AJB Temple]

^^^ spot on Chas. That is exactly the point.

 

[Dr.Al]

If you're cropping a picture or resizing it in at all, you have it open in an image editor. If you have it open in an image editor, select-all, copy (Ctrl-A, Ctrl-C in most Windows applications). Go to the forum and in your reply, hit Ctrl-V.

The image will be pasted in place (so no clicking on "Insert" on an attached image), will be in the same orientation as in the image editor and will contain no EXIF data (the copy operation only copies the image).

No dragging and dropping, no worrying about imgur flakiness and a minimal number of clicks.

 

[TrimTheKing]

Great work and a big thank you.
Are we going back to old oak and such like rather than "well known member"?

I'm looking at this now but I can't for the life of me remember what they were, can anyone else?

Ones I can remember were

Sapling
Old Oak
Sequoia

I think there were two others, maybe only one, but I can't remember them, or what the post thresholds were for them...

 

[AndyP]

Petrified something I think.

 

[TrimTheKing]

Alasdair's found them, bear with me..

Done and sorted.

 

[TomTrees]

Hello team, just wondering if there's any way to upload PDF documents now?

 

[Mike G]

Trophies: has someone been fiddling with the buttons? I've suddenly got about 5 of them.

 

[akirk]

Hello team, just wondering if there's any way to upload PDF documents now?

sure just go to attach files and choose a pdf...

 

[TrimTheKing]

Trophies: has someone been fiddling with the buttons? I've suddenly got about 5 of them.

Yep, me playing with things. Have just turned them off again.

 

[RAF]

I'm looking at this now but I can't for the life of me remember what they were, can anyone else?

Ones I can remember were

Sapling
Old Oak
Sequoia

I think there were two others, maybe only one, but I can't remember them, or what the post thresholds were for them...

With hardly any posts, I remember being called a 'seedling'.

 

[Cabinetman]

I’m loving the new site, it has occurred to me though that the print (point size?) is a little small?
Well it seems that way to me on my iPad.
Ian

 

[AndyP]

I’m using an iPad Air Ian and have not noticed any great changes in the font size.

 

[akirk]

I’m loving the new site, it has occurred to me though that the print (point size?) is a little small?
Well it seems that way to me on my iPad.
Ian

Seems the same on my iPad as any other site - are you able to compare with another site using the same software (such as UKW)?

 

[AJB Temple]

Ian - you can choose on your iPad how the site is scaled.

 

[Mike G]

I’m loving the new site, it has occurred to me though that the print (point size?) is a little small?
Well it seems that way to me on my iPad.
Ian

Ian, if you look for the 3 little parallel lines or dots symbol in the top RH corner of the page, then navigate down to Zoom, you should be able to adjust the size of the display until it suits. Alternatively, Control+ will give you the same effect, but only, I think, as a one-off rather than as a permanent setting.

 

[Mike G]

I don't know if this will help anyone, but it certainly helps me. On the issue of a return-to-top button, which exercised as mildly a few days ago:

If you roll your mouse wheel upwards over the slider on the right of the page, it pops up a temporary arrow adjacent to the slider. Click on this and you go straight to the top. As a mouse-only solution, with no keyboard input necessary, it has really helped speed up navigation.

(As an aside, I believe page lengths are somewhat shorter in the new software compared with the old.)

 

[akirk]

the forum software reacts differently everywhere (in terms of the hardware running it).
e.g. on my computer (windows 11 desktop) - there appears to be no return-to-top arrow, however:
- if I scroll the mouse slightly one appears bottom right
- if scroll above a certain speed the software doesn't put one up
- when I load a page and it shows, a few seconds later it works out that I am not using it today so it fades away

very clever!

 

[Dr.Al]

On a desktop, I don't really find it a big deal to hit the Home key on the keyboard (which works on my computer, as long as I'm not 'focused' on a text box like the one I'm typing in right now).

On the mobile, it would be nice to have some other options (e.g. a "New Posts" link at the bottom of the page, as that's what I'm usually trying to get to when I go to the top). The little arrow in the bottom-right does appear if you start to scroll though, so it's not the end of the world.

I guess it comes down to the way I tend to browse the forum (especially on mobile) - I'll go to the New Posts page and pick a thread to read. I'll then read it to the end, then I'll want to go back to the New Posts page to pick the next thread. Making the process of getting to the New Posts page as easy as possible (especially when at the end of a thread) would be really handy.

 

[AndyT]

Making the process of getting to the New Posts page as easy as possible (especially when at the end of a thread) would be really handy.

The lightning flash button (next to the search button) is persistent on the menu bar and takes you to new posts.

I expect there are lots more little nuances like this that we will all discover over the next few weeks.

 

[Dr.Al]

The lightning flash button (next to the search button) is persistent on the menu bar and takes you to new posts.

I expect there are lots more little nuances like this that we will all discover over the next few weeks.

Ah! I hadn't spotted that. Thanks

 

[TrimTheKing]

(As an aside, I believe page lengths are somewhat shorter in the new software compared with the old.)

Ta-Daaaaaaa, sorted. Default was 20 per page, I've just pushed it to 40, let me know if that's enough. I think there's a balance to not having too many per page because people may want to remember which page a certain things was on, so 40 feels like a decent number.

 

[GaryR]

In our profiles I see a category for "reaction score." What is that meant to tell us?

 

[Cabinetman]

Actually Alasdair, you are correct, I compared Adrian’s worktop blooper on both sites and it’s identical, strange it looked smaller yesterday.
Ian

 

[Mike G]

In our profiles I see a category for "reaction score." What is that meant to tell us?

How many times you've received a "Like" or similar.

 

[AndyT]

I've noticed that when posting, the menu buttons for formatting, inserting smilies etc are greyed out and inaccessible, as in the screenshot here. Is this a problem at my end or the forum's?

 

[TrimTheKing]

Test text

I've noticed that when posting, the menu buttons for formatting, inserting smilies etc are greyed out and inaccessible, as in the screenshot here. Is this a problem at my end or the forum's?View attachment 25779

That only happens to me when in preview mode...