Author Topic: Higher image resolution?  (Read 27924 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

qwertz12

  • Guest
Higher image resolution?
« on: January 16, 2013, 03:53:19 PM »
Hello,

i am a member of some Web pages and wanted to ask whether it is possible to increase the resolution of the images? I believe that a resolution of 1500 to 1000 is outdated! I myself own a retina screen with 2560 to 1440 resolution and because the images are small. Even tablets have a full HD or higher resolution and also the new smartphones have a full HD resolution. The last time where the resolution of the images has been adapted goes back a few years and I think it's once again time to adjust them. A resolution of 2400 to 1600 should be sufficient for the next few years.
What do think the other members of this idea?

Offline alex1711

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
  • TTB rocks!
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #1 on: January 17, 2013, 09:20:25 PM »
I agree with you. I haven't said anything before, because I am not a complainer and not one to bite the hand that feeds me, so-to-speak  :o

But, I have recently upgraded my own monitor to a 27" 2560x1440, and the images don't even fill the screen! I don't think we're going to get it right away, but I think it's okay to expect an upgrade sometime in the near future. I know the other sites out there (for the most part) have larger images. The point-and-shoot cameras these days go up higher than 20 megapixels, so I know the professional ones go even higher than that.

I would like to see it sometime in the future!

Offline JimmyStephans

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 368
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2013, 12:43:34 AM »
I wouldn't expect that to happen with my sites.

1- We have this tracking system on TTB that displays stats about the visitors. The vast majority of visitors are not like you guys and the most common resolution by far is 1280x1024, followed by a laptop and old LCD size of 1440x900 (MacBook Pro standard, not Retina).

Just combining those two groups comes to over 77% of total visitors. Those guys already can't view full images without zooming out.

I feel it would turn off many of those same customers if I try to satisfy the much smaller percentage of users like you guys.

2- The other issue is that I simply don't plan on running these sites that much longer and wouldn't be interested in making any major changes at this time.


Offline JimmyStephans

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 368
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2013, 12:49:34 AM »
By the way - about 6 months ago we asked for suggestions for the new site TeenGlamourGirls and only one person (of about 100) sent an email about image sizes (resolution), but many more did about number of images in a set and video length.


craigboy54

  • Guest
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2013, 05:17:24 AM »
Jimmy, I know that a person can not do something forever, and at some point in time you should get to retire.  However, I hope it is not that soon into the near future.  I also hope that you have an assistant that would like to take over that you would trust.  I know the trusting part would be the hardest.  You have built a brand, and a great one at that. 

Offline alex1711

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
  • TTB rocks!
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #5 on: January 19, 2013, 01:10:44 PM »
Jimmy, I know that a person can not do something forever, and at some point in time you should get to retire.  However, I hope it is not that soon into the near future.  I also hope that you have an assistant that would like to take over that you would trust.  I know the trusting part would be the hardest.  You have built a brand, and a great one at that.

I second that.

Would really hate to see this stuff all go.

bowsersheepdog

  • Guest
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #6 on: May 31, 2013, 04:05:37 PM »
well we all know now that sadly (for us!) jimmy will be retiring from this business shortly, but i still cannot help but think of how, with the likes of petter hegre now running up to 80 megapixels on his site, in time as members of his sites upgraded their computers jimmy would have been able to justify the expense of upgrading his own equipment yet further, and what spectacular results he would have been able to achieve given the lovely girls he works with.

Offline daveo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Only the best teens are JambaTeens!
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #7 on: June 01, 2013, 05:08:01 PM »
Hegre really does 80 megapixels?   A $6000(body-only) Nikon D4 is  a 16 megapixel camera.  I don't see why members would want anything more than that.

bowsersheepdog

  • Guest
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2013, 05:31:21 PM »
i haven't joined hegre yet, but the samples are shown in reduced size, which is still damn good, with a small area magnified in an insert to full resolution, and the results are astonishing. jimmy's pictures are also amazing but if only all us guys had monitors to justify it it would be incredible to see the ttb girls rendered so vividly. :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint: :faint:

Offline JimmyStephans

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 368
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #9 on: June 04, 2013, 12:04:33 AM »
well we all know now that sadly (for us!) jimmy will be retiring from this business shortly, but i still cannot help but think of how, with the likes of petter hegre now running up to 80 megapixels on his site, in time as members of his sites upgraded their computers jimmy would have been able to justify the expense of upgrading his own equipment yet further, and what spectacular results he would have been able to achieve given the lovely girls he works with.

Upgrade my equipment?

bowsersheepdog - I think you have misread the post above... The reason we never went to giant size images has nothing to do with my equipment... if you take the time to read you'll see that most users (by massive percentage) don't have the monitors for such large images. If they get giant images they (or their Browser) will resize down to a size they can view.

I just never felt I should make thousands of fans have to zoom out on every image to satisfy the tiny few that want something bigger than their own monitor.

As for my equipment... I'm guessing I have the best of any teen model sites. The boxes in the top photo is all brand new gear purchased within 2013.

I leave it to you to go double check what that stuff costs.

2 x Canon 5D MK-III Bodies (About $3400 each)
2 x Canon BG-E11 Battery Grip (About $225 each)
2 x Sigma 85mm / 1.4 EX DG Lens (About $850 each)
1 x Sigma 70-200mm Lens (About $1400)

Again, all brand new within last 6 months.

The second photo is the camera safe. Top shelf has 8 Canon 1 series bodies from the original 1D (2004), all the way to the 1Ds MK-III. Each, pretty much the best available at the time it came out. Just this past week I ordered a refurbished Canon 1D X just to play with ( http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/subCategory_10051_10051_-1_12164 ).

Clearly your statement that I need to upgrade my stuff is misplaced.






http://trueteenbabes.com/


bowsersheepdog

  • Guest
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #10 on: June 04, 2013, 05:24:16 PM »
sorry jimmy, i consider my wrist firmly slapped. :o
i rather misunderstood your comment earlier about not being interested in major changes with the site having not so long to run, and thought you meant that both ends of the chain would need changing. i know better now. :thumbsup:

ps. it was worth being wrong to achieve the honour of having my name appear in a jimmy stephans photo! :clap: :clap: :clap:
« Last Edit: June 04, 2013, 05:26:56 PM by bowsersheepdog »

Offline alex1711

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
  • TTB rocks!
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #11 on: June 07, 2013, 09:10:21 AM »
ps. it was worth being wrong to achieve the honour of having my name appear in a jimmy stephans photo! :clap: :clap: :clap:

Lol  :lol:

TedKennedy

  • Guest
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #12 on: June 09, 2013, 05:41:09 AM »
I am unhappy about this. I vote everyone running a 900i monitor gets thrown off the internet.

16:9 1080p monitors have been standard operating procedure (at a minimum) since 2009 at least.

I don't really mind not having enormous 21MP pics, but I am irritated that the landscape pics can't be used as desktop backgrounds because of the upscaling pixelazation that happens.

Jimmy is doing his job. All of you stupids running ten year old monitors need to get a 1920x1200 or 1920x1080 asap.

Offline Chuck S

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 367
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #13 on: June 09, 2013, 02:11:18 PM »
Ted you just have to face the fact that most people don't upgrade until and unless they have a specific need to.  Even in the old days of building your own computer it was only us geeks that did it and rushed right out to buy the newest and best toys.  Most people were and still are perfectly happy with the off the shelf generic boxed units available from the big manufacturers.

Even at most major companies these days only the departments with a specific need get the newest toys.  Their old worn out computers and monitors getting passed down to the general population that only need to run Outlook, Word and Excel.  People just don't spend the money they used to on these types of toys just to have the best.

Offline JimmyStephans

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 368
Re: Higher image resolution?
« Reply #14 on: June 09, 2013, 06:33:46 PM »
In March 2012, StatCounter claims that the 1366x768 resolution had 19.28 percent for PC monitor users compared to 18.6 percent for 1024x768 and that now 1366x768 is the most popular.

1366x768 resolution (mostly inexpensive laptops) was the most popular just 1 year ago. I didn't come across more recent statistics.

Take note, like Chuck said, my customer bases don't always upgrade as fast as the persons that are into tech stuff.

37% of TTB visitors are still using Windows XP.

Persons that are simply pretty girls fans don't spend that much on tech. I do find that those that are into gaming are happen to be into the larger screens, high res video cards, streaming to TV (often through xBox).

But, the truth is that this is a business. Years ago the rule was put in place to cater to the widest group of pretty girl fans as possible. That often means being one step or one generation behind in certain tech areas.

Heck, a full year after updating for WMV videos to h.264/MP4 I get complaints from fans that they can't play them.

I have avoided some of the cool stuff that HTML 5 has to offer because of that large base of XP users because Internet Explorer newer versions don't work on XP (so those users wouldn't see the HTML upgrade and features.).