Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 44

Thread: Yet another Photobucket stunt

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    495

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SLK001 View Post
    This might not be Photobucket's fault at all. It's possible that Firefox is scaling a thumbnail for your screen.
    Nope. The image is very fuzzy but the watermark is sharp as a tack.

    -js
    There are no stupid questions. But there are lots of stupid answers. This is the internet.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    495

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane View Post
    I'm also running Firefox ESR 52.9.0 on my decade old computer with Vista. It definitely appears to have a bearing on why I don't see any watermarks and all the PB hosted pics are clear for me also.
    Interesting. My wife's old Vista laptop will be of no help - it's buried in my sister's back yard (at midnight) with a stake through its heart.

    FF 52.9.0, eh? I'm now running 69.0. Wonder if a version that old is still available in Mozilla's archives.....

    -js
    Last edited by Jim Stewart; 09-11-2019 at 09:24 PM. Reason: typo
    There are no stupid questions. But there are lots of stupid answers. This is the internet.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    495

    Default

    Another data point: in this thread http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/thr...235#post569235

    Posts 3, 5 and 8 have the fuzzy image with sharp watermark. Post 9 has a sharp picture (with watermark).

    Theories are invited...

    -js
    There are no stupid questions. But there are lots of stupid answers. This is the internet.

  4. #24

    Default

    Maybe the owner of the photo in post 9, has actually PAID up the asking ransom, where-as the others are still flippin' the bird at "crudbucket" ?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sunny So Cal
    Posts
    5,105

    Default

    Hey Jim. I didnt open yer latest link, cause my thought is some folks host their own images and apply WM. JR
    My old yahoo group. Bridgeport Mill Group

    https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/...port_mill/info

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    WI/IL border
    Posts
    2,318

    Default

    I think Lakeside53 is correct (post#10). I received quite a few e-mails from Photobucket stating that if my traffic limit continues to be overdrawn, the pictures will be distorted unless I pay a fee. After some thinking, I decided to go with this.

    If I switch the hosting company, all my published links on all forums will be broken. It's a disservice to the members. Then I've heard some news about certain free hosting services closing down. It can (and, most likely, will) happen to any "free cheese" enterprise. And although I hate the way PB treated us recently, I realize that they provided me with free hosting for many years, and I can return the favor afterall (I prepaid for a year: it's a bit less expensive). Yes, I realize that PB may not make it, but I'll take my chances.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    USA MD 21030
    Posts
    5,563

    Default

    The fuzzy image in post #8 is: http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/s...0/100_3599.jpg (user ss352/atty5420)



    The sharp image in post #9 is: http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums/...ling/band1.jpg (user af203/cafsu)


    The fuzzy image in post #3 is: http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b3...w/IMG_0374.jpg (user b301/pace1980)


    The user's album (Billy Pace) shows clear thumbnails:
    https://s22.photobucket.com/user/pac...library?page=1

    And individual images look OK:
    https://photobucket.com/gallery/user...NDU3Mw==/?ref=


    Could be bandwidth blocking for users with more popular images.

    BTW, I get the same blurred images using Chrome.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Stewart View Post
    Another data point: in this thread http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/thr...235#post569235

    Posts 3, 5 and 8 have the fuzzy image with sharp watermark. Post 9 has a sharp picture (with watermark).

    Theories are invited...

    -js
    All those pics are clear of watermarks and sharp images for me.

    Earlier tonight I was looking for pics of a "cathead" and I found one but when I previewed it in my post, it was fuzzy and watermarked. Go figure!
    Last edited by Arcane; 09-12-2019 at 02:28 AM.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Coral Springs, FL
    Posts
    131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane View Post
    All those pics are clear of watermarks and sharp images for me.
    Ditto for me - clear as a bell and no watermarks. This indicates that it is NOTHING that photobucket is doing.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Coral Springs, FL
    Posts
    131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Stewart View Post
    Nope. The image is very fuzzy but the watermark is sharp as a tack.
    This is because the thumbnail that FF is scaling is a .jpg, while the overlayed watermark that PB applies to the thumbnail is a scalable .png.

    This problem is a FIREFOX problem.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •