Originally Posted by tutelary
Wake up, its a screenshot thread. Theres no damn reason to cry about big pics. You know when you open the thread what you're going to get. Get over it. Stop trying to dictate to everyone else and get a real monitor.
what justifies a real monitor? is a laptop screen not a real monitor? ive already have my screen maxed out in resolution. Considering I cant afford to buy a new laptop or computer monitor, you're being a hypocrite yourself by dictating to me that I should buy a new computer or desktop screen.
its people like you that ruin the experience of other members here on the forum, essentially your answer is, "Im better than you so get the **** out of my forums because I have better ****. The forums are only for people like me"
I see this crap go on in audiophile forums also, nice to see this also transfers to videophiles.
you really are truly an elitist jerk in every word.
I dont see how a request to hyperlink thumbnails is worse off than a direct link to a 1088 image. Considering this isnt even a direct screen capture, the resolution is slightly larger than actual source resolution saved in jpeg. The fact that its saved in jpeg already ruins the intention of a full 1080 pic, and its not even saved in 1080, in the first place.
All I see is portions of the pic at a time, which would have the same effect as just cropping it. There also isnt a 480 comparison shot either, use your brain. if you were to put in a real 480 res image from sd dvd, than how would one be able to associate a true comparison? it would look like a small pic versus a big pic.
it doesnt work that way. you can just as easily get a better comparison by crop zooming on areas between the two.
anyhow, as mentioned earlier, hyperlinking as to direct image embedding, would not effect the overall impact of the picture quality, but help others view the post better. hyperlink also opens the image in the entire screen, rather than encase itself within the forum's columns.
tutelary, the jpeg files are already large enough for browsing, self embedding a png file in large picture format would create several megs.
than you have to consider DPI. most people dont use 200+ dpi photos. But those are the resolutions you need to get the most detail. most people run that at 72 or 90 or so, which by itself already loses detail information. if your running 200+ dpi settings (what I do when I work in photoshop and corel with digital imaging, and yes that is what im currently studying, digital editing for films) youre in for a very large heavy file. but than if you are as true to the the screen shot, thats the route you would go. anything less and you'd lose information.