The Power of Women In Spandex - Forums

Tired of Imagebam ads? If this works out, it may provide a solution. Right now I'm limiting this to this thread only and a few select beta testers. We are going to see how much strain it can take, if it can work without the horrendous time outs of the forum attachments, we may do a full roll out. For now, this thread is to test the stability of the mass of attached files. There will probably not be new material here, I'm just loading random stuff from other threads.



30 Images

29 Images


30 images



Posting images in packs larger than 30 at a time will result in upload lockout. Let's see if the post will result in lockout as well...



If you see more thumbs after this line, thats a good thing...





Still going?



Final batch



If all those thumbnails loaded, I think this will work.

If any of our frequent contributors would like a beta account for the photo hosting post here or PM me. At this time I do not recommend using your beta account for general posting, service may be revoked at any time. But if this holds up, we will have an easy and fast way to share here.

Killatron wrote:If any of our frequent contributors would like a beta account for the photo hosting post here or PM me.

Obviously that comment is (pointing at)

turboimagehost, which i use frequently, doesnt have as many ads and doesnt open up pages and is less distracting than imagebam....its the best 'behaved' out of all of the existing hosting services

It still looks like the photos are being hosted by a third party and not directly a part of this forum like attachments??
Is this third party an integral part of tpowis forum? [if that hosting service ceases to exist or is out of service do we still lose the photos? just like imagebam, or any other hosting service?

obviously no ads so it should work the best.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
update: here is a beta test post of codes:
my impression is: it works fine but you have to log in; i use the free non log in versions of imagebam, turbo, ect.....also the limit of 30 versus 100 and also with turbo image host, image bam you can track what youve uploaded or not on a list that you dont have to scroll up@down on the web page [so its a bit more cumbersome especially if you have a big folder and you are taking some pics from one pART AND OTHERS FROM ANOTHER]; i will use it if i have to but i would still prefer turboimage host since i tend to post 50+ photos per post for the most time; turbo image host is as fast as this beta without needing to log in and the list tells you what has uploaded and how much more time it will take; if i have less than 30 images i wont mind using the beta. I dont know what the size file limit is? with most of the larger hosting sites you can do up to 10mb.........................................................................


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The module is not hosted by a 3rd party, its running off the same place the videos are stored. It is however a separate database than the forum, which helps distribute the server load.

I might be able to increase the attachment count per session, but there would likely need to be a built in pause. As I mentioned, you CAN upload a lot more. But you have to do it in 30 image sessions. Upload 30, get the links and add them to your post, post another 30, get the links, etc. The only limit there is the maximum size a single post can be text wise, which is like 10k characters or something.

The tools for checking on your uploads are few, but you can see everything you ever posted and see the view counts. There might be way to get galleries going in there as well. But you can't share a gallery of sorts, just posts.

The important part is firstly, it's fast, secondly it will always be free of pop ups and hardcore porn. I may put targeted ads on it, but they will be relevant sponsored content, not random porn (still never a pop up). Finally, reliability, who knows when some random host just goes belly up, or gets bought out. The images stored with us will last as long as this forum does (which I would hope is long after I'm gone lol).

Turboimage looks much better than imagebam I'll agree.

The thumbnails/pictures work very well. This is a great development and I'm very thankful for it!

12 and 19 MB and 11mb sized photos as a test:
[please visit my post today regarding topic coplay for more pics and sources]


rei_ayanami___instrumentality_by_jatek-d6rf4yy.19mb.png has been succesfuly uploaded

Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 67108864 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 42544000 bytes) in /home/content/15/11927515/html/TPOWIS.NET/datacore/photohost/inc/functions.php on line 146
id_2_by_dani_foca-d6ke74i.11mb.jpg has been succesfuly uploaded

Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 67108864 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 13056 bytes) in /home/content/15/11927515/html/TPOWIS.NET/datacore/photohost/inc/functions.php on line 142

OOPS killatron looks like a 19@11mb size photos are 'too large to swallow' for your hosting service 1 of 3 means back to the drawing board my friend!!!
eerily reminiscent of obama care.gov website when it debuted back in oct [it wasnt ready for prime time; just yet ]

just like the subpoenas that catherine sebelius and those responsible for that website got; yourself and executives for godaddy.com should be receiving subpoenas by certified mail (@ your PA and AZ addresses respectively) a week or two after thanksgiving [talk about thanksgiving feast indigestion]
ALL KIDDING ASIDE; we are in the testing phase---that first file failure is a .png and its source is: http://jatek.deviantart.com/art/Rei-Aya ... -408852970 ....2nd failure one was a .jpg so it looks like it cant handle 10+mb sized files for the most part

i also noticed that a couple of large files (~9 mb that i did on my last coplay hosted post that included other fotos on turboimage didnt take as long as these 3; conclusion turboimage host might be faster than your beta

deleted because i simply used the quote feature hence it duplicated my post above...moderator can delete this post; thank you

The problem you encountered is a bit more complex than that.

Each server operation is granted up to 64MB of memory. To resize an image, if its over 10MP that can take well over 100MB to do. The maximum file you can upload in terms of space it takes up does not directly equal that measure. A 1MB JPEG could easily require 100s of megs of RAM to process (it'd look like shit, but it would still require the resources to process). File size is indeed limited to 100MB per file, but the server will run out of RAM far before that is ever reached for a single file.

Here is a 15MB 4000x3000 photo that is easily handled by the software on the server.


Here is that same image but at 3500x2625 in PNG at just under 17MB, again easily handled by the host


The problem is that apparently PNG files take more RAM to transform than JPEGs, at least with the GD library the module uses. Either way, I'm gonna adjust the resolution limit to more reflect this server side limit. A limit that I think will not affect the vast majority of photo shares.

i will hold off on those subpoenas

the 2nd photo that failed is .JPG!: http://www.deviantart.com/download/3970 ... 1385519106

since we are just testing at this time try loading up to 30; all different sizes and see what happens which load or not...i may try that just to see what happens....deviantart is excellent source for finding large sized files.
i know most of us rarely run across 10+mb sized photos; if i do {once every 2 months if that} i use the paint feature to crop it by 10-20% and resave it as a .jpg and that takes out 30-50+% of its size....so for 99.9% of the time i doubt any poster here will have that problem; but its good to test

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10:26 pm test of 26 files ranging from as small as 79-97kb and up to 11.3mb (3 of those) incl the ones that did not load earlier (2 files are .png)
RESULTS: took ~almost 20 minutes normal because of huge files
the repeated photos are due to the failure of a photo to upload.... it 'covers it up' by repeating a photo that did upload
the 3 photos that failed to upload are 2 of the 11mb ones and one 3.7mb
finally one photo failed to load up

todays test simply involves repeating my (turbo)hosted photos from my leggings post today. mostly small sized photos about 7 over 1 mb or so with a max of 1.7......should have no problems

results: no problems every file is hosted perfectly

back to testing large files:
2.6mb.test.jpg (2.66MB) - 1152KB Uploaded
1089x727_16mb.test.j... (15.98MB) - File Size Error source: http://www.jjsci.org/gavin/gavin-1.jpg
1089x727_20mb.test.j... (20.27MB) - File Size Error source: http://www.jjsci.org/gavin/gavin-3.jpg
3300x4900pixel_6mb.t... (6.98MB)
4000x3000.6.5mb.1.te... (6.87MB)
4000x3000.6.5mb.test... (6.69MB)
4000x3000.test.jpg (3.69MB)
4000x3000pixel_3.9mb... (3.94MB)
4300x2800_5mb.a.test... (6.31MB)
4300x2800_5mb.test.j... (5.16MB)
9477183587_198245b89... (3.57MB)
9513694180_0328da0f8... (2.2MB)
AS killatron can see it appears only the 16, 20+mb size files are "'TOO LARGE TO SWALLOW" for your hosting service...if you were promised up to 100mb sized hosted photos...sounds very similar to obama's promise that you could keep your health plan coverage you already have a couple of years ago...reality is you cant keep your old coverage and you cant host 20+ mb sized files BUT since most of us dont run across those files then it appears that your beta test hosting WILL WORK and it should be implemented/incorporated into this forum....the largest photo i have run across in all my years here are 12-20mb and only a handful; as i said earlier i used microsoft paint to crop it (a 12-13mb) to 80% and then resaved the photo under.jpg and it reduced it to a more modest 3.5mb which any of the large hosting services can easily handle.

It's not a matter of being promised, it's a matter of a number of technical limitations. As I said, the script will allow 100MB images, even larger, the server will store 100MB images as well. The problem is manipulating large images is a bit of a mixed bag. For a photo be be altered, it needs to be uncompressed, this can make even a 1MB JPEG take up well over 100MB of RAM in some cases of extreme resolution. The server will not allocate more than about 64MB RAM per operation, so thats whats limiting the file size. I might be able to get that extended, but then I would probably run into other issues.

So to make this simple, Im going to say the hard limit for images is 10-12 megapixel with a file size limit of 10MB/image.

just introducing Claudia; this 23 year old journalist and advertising agent from Madrid, Spain who has mostly med to large size photos on her blog...files range from just one 535kb and the rest are from 1100-8300kb {11 of them 5+mb}
http://tendenciesfashandbeauty.wordpress.com/

Thank you Killatron. It is really a good advantage! How is the actual status of this project?

As of now there is an issue with the scrypt that prevents it from sending out emails. But other than that, it works great and is good to go.

But being as it can't send out emails, it cant get people registered for it. So I figure I'll sign up contributors manually for now. Anyone who wants an account should PM me or post here.

im interested

I'm interested as well.