Welcome back! Current status, known issues, and more.

Signalprick said:
What is your point? If you read any of it you would know I'm taking pics on the most basic setting my phone has. 16:9 (3.4 mega pixel) 2560x1440 resolution. Those pics have worked for years on this forum without some hosting site. They work on all other forums and social media I am also on. Going through them they are all under 1.4 mb. If it's worked fine for years I should be happy now that I have to jump through hoops with an upgrade? It's not like I'm freeloading here. Remember photobucket? So again, what is your point?
Click to expand...

Imgur. So what’s your point?
 
Signalprick Signalprick have you tried to re-upload a photo at (or less than) 3840x2160, under the 2MB cap, since the change was made? Note than a pic of 2160x3840 would fail because the limitation is not axis-agnostic; 3840 is a hard width limit, 2160 a hard height limit.

If you can't upload an image within those constraints, then perhaps the application's config change didn't take effect (or possibly won't until the app itself is kicked/restarted; I'm no xenforo admin and I've not hosted a PHP webapp in about a decade).

I'd try myself but I'm just a basic knoob. Maybe another paid member could give it a whack in case you're in no mood... but whatever the case, let's try to figure out if there's some misalignment between the forum's configured parameters and the way it's actually behaving, and then I'd bet it can be sorted.
 
knoob said:
Signalprick Signalprick have you tried to re-upload a photo at (or less than) 3840x2160, under the 2MB cap, since the change was made? Note than a pic of 2160x3840 would fail because the limitation is not axis-agnostic; 3840 is a hard width limit, 2160 a hard height limit.

If you can't upload an image within those constraints, then perhaps the application's config change didn't take effect (or possibly won't until the app itself is kicked/restarted; I'm no xenforo admin and I've not hosted a PHP webapp in about a decade).

I'd try myself but I'm just a basic knoob. Maybe another paid member could give it a whack in case you're in no mood... but whatever the case, let's try to figure out if there's some misalignment between the forum's configured parameters and the way it's actually behaving, and then I'd bet it can be sorted.
Click to expand...
Yes I have. Here us a pic I took today and it works even before the parameter changes, below it I'll post the details:
20210504_140158.jpg

Screenshot_20210504-140610_Gallery.jpg

Next is a pic that will not upload so I screenshot it. Below it I will also post the details:

Screenshot_20210504-191306_Gallery.jpg

Screenshot_20210504-140620_Gallery.jpg

I mean am I missing something here? That 2nd pic is 2560 x 1440 and 1.31mb. Its should load now correct?
 
Signalprick said:
I mean am I missing something here? That 2nd pic is 2560 x 1440 and 1.31mb. Its should load now correct?
Click to expand...
From what I can see, it should load, and it's odd that the change Spark made to accommodate didn't seem to have brought about the desired result.

All we seem to know for sure is that this version of XenForo is new to us, and either totally or relatively new to Spark, too. There are going to be wrinkles to iron out, as with any upgrade, and even if Spark spent months preparing and tinkering, he couldn't have tested for all possible edge- and corner-cases.

Give the sysadmin some time and I'll bet it'd get sorted, especially if it's impacting all paid users the same as it is you.
 
The first image is 1MB. The second is 1.3MB. There is a heighth and width limit in addition to a overall size limit. Both requirements should be met.

I agree, it did work before or rather, the previous forum software was less restrictive for whatever reason even though the actual requirements seem to technically not changed much. I've come through it and am also going to be more careful with what I upload to save space.

I'm not dismissing your concerns or frustration. You use this forum as part of your business so it's understandable.
 
...and we know from your screenshots alone that the 2160 height limit works, so it might be the width constraint alone that's a bit janky. If a (paid) member who's not Signalprick Signalprick could snag an image from the web that's 3840x2160 and under 2MB and attempt to attach, that'd probably help determine whether it's an issue that's impacting more than just one user. Then if that user has success and is not a knifemaker-type subscriber, then we could have a knifemaker subscriber try, and then we can write our sixth grade reports on the scientific theory and how it helped solve a problem.
 
josiahg52 said:
The first image is 1MB. The second is 1.3MB. There is a heighth and width limit in addition to a overall size limit. Both requirements should be met.

I agree, it did work before or rather, the previous forum software was less restrictive for whatever reason even though the actual requirements seem to technically not changed much. I've come through it and am also going to be more careful with what I upload to save space.

I'm not dismissing your concerns or frustration. You use this forum as part of your business so it's understandable.
Click to expand...
It's all good man. I was just bringing up the issue. Guess it's just me. I had no expectation of when it should be addressed just wanted to provide info to help figure it out. Thank you!
 
Signalprick said:
It's all good man. I was just bringing up the issue. Guess it's just me. I had no expectation of when it should be addressed just wanted to provide info to help figure it out. Thank you!
Click to expand...

That's what I was trying to do also in many of my previous posts, too. What I discovered, I think, is that the old software was more tolerant with overall size but also was also maybe more generous with width and height but maybe only by a few hundred pixels.
 
The old software was straight up broken when it came to limits - it pretty much ignored them. Which I've stated, repeatedly.

Upload your image to imgur.com and link to it and maybe we can see WTF is going on. Or upload it to google drive and link to it there, and we can look at it & see what's going on. "It's on my phone and my phone says [x]" doesn't mean that your phone is actually displaying accurate info - my iPhone 12 can correctly ID image sizes when in the album but not when uploading through the browser
 
Thank you, Spark. You're showing much higher level of engagement and interest than any of the Admin/owners of the other forums I'm a member of. The main difference is that you still have an interest and ownership. I appreciate the effort.

I'll say again, the default black style on mobile is very, very good.
 
josiahg52 said:
Thank you, Spark. You're showing much higher level of engagement and interest than any of the Admin/owners of the other forums I'm a member of. The main difference is that you still have an interest and ownership. I appreciate the effort.

I'll say again, the default black style on mobile is very, very good.
Click to expand...
Man, the more I interact with y'all the worse things get around here, so I try to be as unobtrusive as possible & laissez-faire it.

As for the style, I can't take credit - some dude on Xenforo.com created the skin and I just changed a couple colors
 
I'll see what I can figure tomorrow. Thank you
 
Anyone else getting 6-8 hour delays on email notices? Missed a couple messages today. This is a new issue. Thanks
 
This has been a constant issue for Yahoo and AOL users. With the change over to Verizon I don't know if that effects your domain now
 
Nice work on the slight changes to the grey skin Spark Spark . :thumbsup: It's easier to read now, and is by far my favorite overall, both day and night. It's nice not having to change back and forth depending on ambient light levels.

Stupid question, and I'm sure it would be WAY down on the to-do list, but how hard would it be to get it back to where the user's join date and post count displayed under their avatar? That's probably the biggest thing I've noticed that's missing vs. the old software, and not something I'd really realized I'd miss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top