posting problem halloween 2017

[brynn]

testing

[brynn]

Hhmmmm

500 Internal Server Error
    A generic error message, given when an unexpected condition was encountered and no more specific message is suitable.

Big help 

No forum errors showing.  Let's see what I can find on the server.

[brynn]

Tried posting the problem image here - won't post.  I still don't get an error message.  But I do recall that when we had trouble with large images before, this was exactly the same behavior.  I would just get a blank white page, and nothing was posted.

Hhm, just noticed this.  Image is hosted on deviant art, but linked to OCA....  Nah, that shouldn't matter....

Trying to find where you got the original image from DA, which according to the message (which actually did post) is the middle url below.  Found the other 2 at DA, but not that one, yet.

Code: [Select]

https://orig00.deviantart.net/afb1/f/2017/303/3/b/houndstooth_pattern_thumbnail_by_lazururh-dbs7zow.png

https://orig00.deviantart.net/d484/f/2017/303/6/7/houndstooth_patterns_by_lazururh-dbs7v68.png

https://pre00.deviantart.net/581f/th/pre/f/2017/303/6/7/houndstooth_patterns_by_lazururh-dbs7v68.png

But here's an odd thing, which maybe has something to do with it.  If you visit https://lazururh.deviantart.com/ and open 3 of the (currently) 4 images of the houndstooth weave on that page (2 thumbnails and 2 larger) then right-click > View Image Info, they give Location: (the url) as a PNG file.  But  for Type: they give "JPEG Image".

I've never seen the Type not match the format for the Location.  Granted I still haven't found the original usedin the other message.  But I wonder if that conflict could be part of the problem?

I'll go ahead and post this much, then in the next message, I'll try to post one of those conflicting Image Info items.

[brynn]

[brynn]

Ah well -- thought it was a good theory.  Guess we're back to the size being the problem. 

But where's the problematic original?  I mean, I know where it is, but there must be a link to it somewhere, from which you retrieved its url.

[Lazur]

Deviantart is a hellhole of an image host. They have a formula for embedding files on forums with a frame, I'm not quite sure how to do nor would follow anyway. Comes with their light green frame and a button "link to the original" or something like that.

Instead, clicking on the download button, and using the downloaded image's url. That is the original image's url, the rest is their generated jpeg versions of other sizes. -You upload only at one size and can even set a full size view size. 1600 px wide for example. Setting original image size for that.
So when you go to an image, by clicking twice appears the original image only.
Which may not even have the right url. In general the resized image's url's don't work after awhile, so it's not a good idea embedding those.

Used the four houndstooth pattern image in the "thumbnail" embedding for the ocal link as ocal's thumbnail had a rendering issue -and obviously only contains one quarter only, unlike the exported raster image from deviantart showing four variants.

Here is the ocal image:


here is the link to da:
"image too big" (3600 px/3600 px)


My general thought is since they are hosted elsewhere they shouldn't cause problems when embedding.
But it seems the forum may generate smaller substitutes to fit with the page and stores them locally.

[brynn]

Hhuuhm -- Didn't know you could use a download link to retrieve the image url!  Oh, I see.  In this case "download" means open the image so you can save it, I guess?

Aah, found it. Don't click on Download button. When you click on the thumbnail, to get the image's page, I was right-clicking on that image, to get the url.  But to get the url you had, you have to click on it, to make it full size.  THEN right click to get the url.

Somehow I thought copying the url fresh would make a difference.  But I guess it really won't.

[brynn]

Sorry, falling asleep yesterday.

Yes, the forum does generate its own smaller images, depending on how the admin configures it.  I have set for 1200 x 600.  So I guess if an image exceeds one of those numbers, it generates something smaller.  I'm just trying look up how it decides what size to make, but so far, can't find.

Attachments are different.  There's also no limit on the size of attachments.  And after a certain size, it creates its own thumbnail.  But it doesn't say what size that is.  There's only an option for the maximum size of thumbnails....which I'm not sure if that makes sense, so I could be misunderstanding something.

Anyway, made some wide rectangles, to test is there is a width limit.


w=2000


w=2500


w=3000

[brynn]

w=3500


w=4000

[brynn]

Hhm, maybe it needs some height combined with width?

Ah yes.  Cannont post 4000 x 4000 PNG.

Trying 3000 x 3000:

[brynn]

3500 x 3500

[brynn]

3700 x 3700

[brynn]

Ok, the limit seems to be somewhere between 3700 and 3800 square, for just the simple square.  Perhaps the reason Lazur's 3600 square image wouldn't load is because it has more kb.

My 3700 square is 61 kb, and 3800 is 64.  Looking for size of Lazur's image.

It does seem odd that he was able to post it, but now can't edit.  And can't seem to be posted again.  I can't really explain that.  But we seem to be near our limits here.

Of course I could increase the limits.  I'm just not sure if it's practical.  Comments?

[brynn]

I do see one difference.  For my 3700 square, the forum has added a 600 x 600 frame for it.  Now I'm investigating why that was not added to Lazur's image.

Maybe it was because of making it a link?  Testing....

[brynn]

3700 x 3700

[brynn]

Hhm, no, making it into a link, the forum still adds the 600 ht and width. 

Maybe something about the DA image?

I wonder what would happen if it take the bbcode from Lazur's message, and manually add the 600 code to it?

Let's see:

[brynn]

Hah, what do you know?

Could there be something in the DA url which instructs not to make the image smaller?  Which the forum recognizes and doesn't automatically give it the extra bbcode?

Well, no matter which way you look at it, I still think we are looking at the limits of the forum...actually it's a limit of the server, somewhere between 3500 and 4000 pixels square.  Clearly there are some other variables which play into it.

But Lazur, if you still want to edit that message, I'm guessing you could add the bbcode that you see above, and you'll be able to successfully edit that message.

[Lazur]

Thank's for the troubleshooting!

Got it edited -mentioned post-.

[brynn]

You're welcome.

I've asked for some help in the SMF forum, and learning more about how the options work.  (As much as I wish for better language for many of Inkscape's options, SMF is comparatively rather atrocious!)

For example, the option "Max width of posted pictures" (and the same thing for height).  To me, that sounds like the forum would simply not allow images larger than those limits.  But what it really means, is that it changes the size of images larger than that!

And the reason it seems so inconsistent and confusing, is because if it's the width that goes over, it changes the width to that limit, and let's the height automatically adjust to keep the proportion.  But if it's the height which goes over the limit, it makes the image that height, and let's the width auto-adjust!  (It uses the width and height tags.)  Then you can click on them to get the full size.

But hopefully I can find a way to result in a better appearance for the forum.

[brynn]

Now playing with options.  w = 1200, h = disabled limits

3000 x 3000 image

[brynn]

400 x 800

[brynn]

3000 x 3000 with symmetrical object (to detect stretching)

[brynn]

800 x 800 w/gear

[Lazur]

Some more "heavy duty" for testing:

[brynn]

Thanks!  Will re-use them again, when testing potential new way to display images.  https://forum.inkscapecommunity.com/index.php?topic=826.0