Posting images

[GusGF]

5. How do I post an image in a message?
Inline images are limited to 640x640 pixels.  Your image needs to be hosted somwhere on the web: flickr, your own webspace, etc, not on your local PC's hard drive and certainly not Photobucket, who are bait-and-switch bottom feeding scumsuckers.  It is recommended not to link directly (i.e. using img tags) to an image hosted on someone else's website - this can impact on their bandwidth allowance, and they can get angry about it (& in extreme cases, replace the image with another one either telling you off or showing something unpleasant instead).  Either just post a regular URL pointing to the image, or host it elsewhere if the copyright allows.

It is recommended not to link directly (i.e. using img tags) to an image hosted on someone else's website

just post a regular URL pointing to the image

What's the difference as both have to fetch the resource from the source site, effecting their bandwidth. Or does the img tag download a 640x640 thumbnail from the source and display it inline with the message?

I don't think I've ever used the BBS img tag and I assume it is more restrictive than a Hyperlink and will only accept an image link that ends with a photo format file extension e.g. jpg, .png, .gif, etc.

[Kim]

AIUI the [img] tag just gets turned into a normal HTML <img> tag, with appropriate size constraints added.  Acceptable image formats presumably left as an exercise for the reader's browser, so all the usual web image formats should work.

If you link to a larger image, the browser downloads it and scales it to fit the page, as is normal in HTML.  The forum's size limit saves screen space (so stops massive images mucking up the page formatting), but does nothing to save network bandwidth.  Obviously therefore the optimum solution is to scale the image to something less than 640px before linking to it.  If you want to be elegant, you can wrap the image in a [url] tag linking to the full size version.

This was all very simple back in the early-2000s when the forum software was written, as you could reasonably expect people to understand how the internet works.  It hasn't aged well.

Linking to an image on somebody else's website is bad netiquette, but I'd suggest that a third-party service you're using to host your own images doesn't really count as 'somebody else's website'.  It might violate the T&Cs of your service, of course, but that's your own problem.  Also see above for an approximation of the last time anyone cared about 'netiquette'.  The modern solution is to either throw bandwidth at the problem, or simply refuse to serve images to hotlinkers.

[fuaran]

Most image hosting websites specifically allow hotlinking. ie they are happy to provide some bandwidth to allow this, so they will have factored that into their costs.
Whereas some random personal website may not have done. So it may use up all of their bandwidth, or overload their server, or cost them money.

If a site provides BBcode for you, it probably means hotlinking is allowed. Though they may have some terms as to how to use it. eg a limit on the resolution. And Flickr specifies that you should also link back to the original photo page - their BBcode includes this.

[Mr Larrington]

Plus an image that you upload to $PHOTO-SITE is less likely to disappear than on on someone else’s, unless the site is Photobucket.

[Jaded]

Photobouquet leave the photo up there but slap a logo across it to show the world that you are a monstrous skinflint oaf.

[Kim]

Plus an image that you upload to $PHOTO-SITE is less likely to disappear than on on someone else’s, unless the site is Photobucket.

Indeed.

I'm occasionally guilty of hotlinking, but mostly for  a) "here's a widget that'll do that" purposes, with a link to a purveyor of widgets  or  b) mindless memery

My own images live on a web server that I control, where I'm in advanced stages of denial about needing better photo management software.

[Mr Larrington]

My own images live on a web server that I control, where I'm in advanced stages of denial about needing better photo management software.

I should probably think about doing likewise in order to extricate myself from the Eebil Clutches of Big Data in the form of Flickr, but wouldn’t know where to start.  I haz a domain name and, er, that’s about it.