|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » When is a image too big? |
| 1-10 of 10 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 01-06-09 12:19pm - 5829 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Jeffrey99 (0)
Active User  Posts: 106 Registered: Nov 04, '08 Location: Good Ole Midwest USA |
When is a image too big? A webmaster on a sites forum got me thinking, when is a image too big? For example images from like Penthouse or Ron Harris are normally 3000 or 4000 pixels. On a portrait image, that means looking at it 100%, most people will have to scroll left or right to see the image. The reason I like them that big is for the landscape photos, because my screen is 1440x900, so I can easily downscale a 3000 or 4000px image to fit nicely as desktop wallpaper or PS3 or 360 etc. However if the image is smaller then that, then there isn't any good way without upscaling and distorting the image to make it atleast 1440 wide. So I was just wondering everyone else's thought on that. Do most people on here actually care how big the images are? | |
|
||
| 01-06-09 12:34pm - 5829 days | #2 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:20am | |
|
||
| 01-06-09 01:59pm - 5829 days | #3 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
You can already buy projectors to hook up to your DVD player, PS3, laptop, whatever, but they are nowhere near as affordable as a nice big computer monitor, though big flat screen TVs are somewhat in their league. The question here is, not when is an image too big, but how big you do really want to see whatever it is your viewing? Already, closeups are bigger than normal (life-size) on my 15" WS laptop -- how freakish/cool/educational are they going to be beamed out to a 10'x8' wall? Obviously, some videos like POV, plus photos with more wide shots, would be pretty interesting to see in this size. It is just that a lot of porn, minus the "epics" and "big budget" titles, is not really shot for huge projection, like many films are, but can still be enjoyed to a degree on a big screen. I do like big images -- hell, I love them -- but I still keep a lot of the smaller and smaller images from the '90s because, size aside, I do still enjoy them. Eventually, they may appear like thumbnails compared to today's mammoth pics, but I will cross that bridge in the future. One thing I don't like is when older images are upscaled or "remastered" in an attempt to match today's sizes. It never really works, especially if the sources were not that big in the first place. It is cool to see sites rerelease old material, but you just cannot make something out of nothing. This may be treading on what others have said in related threads, but regardless of size, the photos, and the photographers who create them, need to be good in order to justify the larger and larger sizes. It doesn't matter if it is 12000x8000, if half the image is out of focus, the lightning is all wrong, and the model is stuck in a forced and fake pose -- it will still suck! Bring on the big images, but bring better photographers as well! "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 01-06-09 03:31pm - 5829 days | #4 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
Supersize me, just in case! I don't need the largest pictures right now but might if I want to keep them and look at them in the future on a bigger monitor or on TV. I had so many sets I had saved that were in 800x600 and even smaller and had to throw many of them away because they didn't look great on my new 22" (actually 21.5") monitor. | |
|
||
| 01-06-09 05:13pm - 5828 days | #5 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 20, 2023, 11:20am | |
|
||
| 01-06-09 05:42pm - 5828 days | #6 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
Big is beautiful. I like the 6000 px images at HegreArt, and I'm also pleased that MetArt, MetModels, Penthouse, and several other sites have images available past 3000 px. I haven't joined a site that offers under 1600 px in a while. Was just looking around ClubSandy and PixAndVideo and thinking how nice the newer pics looked, but that I won't join them again until they go bigger than their 1280 size. How big is too big? Maybe 10,000 px? I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 01-07-09 11:55am - 5828 days | #7 | |
|
jd1961 (0)
Active User  Posts: 296 Registered: Jun 07, '07 |
I have a new 22" monitor that can be flipped on a hinge! So you get a long perspective for those full length photos, must have been created with porn in mind! http://hpshopping.speedera.net/www.shopp...ucts/ry117aa_400.jpg | |
|
||
| 01-07-09 01:03pm - 5828 days | #8 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
Someone suggested that to me some time ago because I hate portrait style pictures and would like to see everything in landscape. My present monitor doesn't allow me to do this. I envy you because a monitor that can be flipped would be perfect for me, this way I could tolerate "portrait." What happens if you swivel to "landscape", is there an automatic adjustment or do you have to adjust each picture manually? Probably a dumb question! | |
|
||
| 01-07-09 01:42pm - 5828 days | #9 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User  Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
I know with the older dell monitors with that swivel capability, you had to tell the video card to adjust the orientation each time you changed it. My guess is that remains the case unless the monitor has some sort of USB connection to talk to the computer or something similar. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 01-07-09 02:40pm - 5828 days | #10 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
Sigh! I was afraid of that. That would be a real pain in the butt. With the average set you'd be forever telling your video card to switch any time you came across a landscape type picture. That would be even worse than a reduced, letter boxed "portrait" picture on a wide screen. | |
|
||
| 1-10 of 10 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
