Why are there so few exhibit pictures nowadays?

[lintworm]

Can we not upload videos anymore? Seems there are no "allowed extensions"

That is true, due to technical reasons it is at the moment not possible to upload videos. This possibility will come back after the next forum upgrade however, though Simon will have some work to do before it is possible again....

all for them to get very little reaction because no-one knows they're there once they're off the front page of images.

Certainly why I have found myself uploading fewer and fewer images.

What I have started doing is mention in the relevant forum that I uploaded some pictures (for e.g. Aquatis Lausanne), this can go together with a news post after the respective visit. I am certainly planning to keep on uploading new pictures of enclosures.

 

[Chlidonias]

Can we not upload videos anymore? Seems there are no "allowed extensions"

See Video uploads disabled

 

[devilfish]

Another issue is the maximum size of images which can be uploaded. Since the major update I've only occasionally wanted to upload photos and most of those attempts are thwarted because despite repeated compression I'm still being greeted with a message informing me that the photos are too large to upload. Along with the maximum limit of 5 photos pressuring selection of interesting photos, very few enclosure photos would now tend to make the cut.

 

[LaughingDove]

Another issue is the maximum size of images which can be uploaded. Since the major update I've only occasionally wanted to upload photos and most of those attempts are thwarted because despite repeated compression I'm still being greeted with a message informing me that the photos are too large to upload. Along with the maximum limit of 5 photos pressuring selection of interesting photos, very few enclosure photos would now tend to make the cut.

I've found that problematic as well, so what I've been doing to avoid the message that pictures are too large is scaling them down in bulk to 75% or 50% (depending on original photo size). One of the easiest ways I've found of doing this is to use on online image resize website like this one and choose resize by percentage.

 

[lintworm]

Another issue is the maximum size of images which can be uploaded. Since the major update I've only occasionally wanted to upload photos and most of those attempts are thwarted because despite repeated compression I'm still being greeted with a message informing me that the photos are too large to upload. Along with the maximum limit of 5 photos pressuring selection of interesting photos, very few enclosure photos would now tend to make the cut.

The problem with being too large is mostly about pixel size (after compression they are below 10 mb anyway), so I tend to rescale them all to fit the maximum number.

It is worth noting that Premium members can upload as many pictures as they want simultaneously

 

[Simon Hampel]

Another issue is the maximum size of images which can be uploaded. Since the major update I've only occasionally wanted to upload photos and most of those attempts are thwarted because despite repeated compression I'm still being greeted with a message informing me that the photos are too large to upload. Along with the maximum limit of 5 photos pressuring selection of interesting photos, very few enclosure photos would now tend to make the cut.

How large are the photos you are trying to upload?

As cameras have increased in capability and resolution, so have file sizes - so the file size limitations we used to use are now possibly too small.

 

[devilfish]

Thank you both for the advice. What a pain to have to go through it every time. Despite entering the pixel numbers it still took a few attempts to get right. In its current incarnation I don't think I'll be uploading many more than five photos at a time to the gallery anyway.

 

[devilfish]

How large are the photos you are trying to upload?

As cameras have increased in capability and resolution, so have file sizes - so the file size limitations we used to use are now possibly too small.

6000 x 4000, which now explains the issue! Although none of my attempted uploads were larger than a megabyte.

 

[dublinlion]

Devilfish, Those pics you've just posted on the gallery are fantastic. They are such rare species and the photography is really good.
I just clicked on them by chance and I would advise everyone to have a look.

 

[littleRedPanda]

Devilfish, Those pics you've just posted on the gallery are fantastic. They are such rare species and the photography is really good.
I just clicked on them by chance and I would advise everyone to have a look.

I was looking through them earlier and had to stop before I broke his like Alert

 

[devilfish]

Thank you both very much!

 

[birdsandbats]

I can confirm that there is a "new comments" search in the new version coming soon (the software is now available - I just need some time to prepare the site for upgrade), and when I do the upgrade I will also ensure that the photo description is more functional and visible.

When is this coming?

 

[Simon Hampel]

6000 x 4000, which now explains the issue! Although none of my attempted uploads were larger than a megabyte.

No, sorry - what is the filesize of the images?

The resolution doesn't matter - they will be automatically resized down to a smaller size once uploaded. There is, however a maximum filesize limit which I can adjust (the trick is to set it high enough to not cause problems while keeping it low enough to avoid it being abused).

 

[Simon Hampel]

When is this coming?

Will be a few months yet - a huge amount of work required to get the site upgraded.

Some more information from this post back in October last year: I miss the old Zoochat format

... I never did get around to posting my "what's coming" thread, so I might do that now.

Edit: ZooChat v4 suggestions

 

[devilfish]

No, sorry - what is the filesize of the images?

The resolution doesn't matter - they will be automatically resized down to a smaller size once uploaded. There is, however a maximum filesize limit which I can adjust (the trick is to set it high enough to not cause problems while keeping it low enough to avoid it being abused).

Variable file size, although all had been compressed to somewhere under 900kb.

 

[Simon Hampel]

Variable file size, although all had been compressed to somewhere under 900kb.

And you still have difficulty uploading a 900kb file? That's a bit strange.

Can you email me an example of a file which you are unable to upload so I can test it at my end? Send it to support@zoochat.com - thanks.

There may be another server-level setting which is limiting things based on resolution which I'll have to track down.

 

[devilfish]

And you still have difficulty uploading a 900kb file? That's a bit strange.

Can you email me an example of a file which you are unable to upload so I can test it at my end? Send it to support@zoochat.com - thanks.

There may be another server-level setting which is limiting things based on resolution which I'll have to track down.

Sorry I've just seen this - I'd logged in to tell you it's all working easily and smoothly. Thanks!

 

[devilfish]

The same issue has recurred, unfortunately. Has anything changed to bring this about?

 

[KevinB]

I recently came across this thread and for me it raises an important question, given some plans I have.

I am considering going through my old photos and posting the best of the animal photos I've made throughout the years I have engaged in animal photography in zoos.

However, given the recent complaints about the lack of exhibit photographs, would this be consired undesirable and should I perhaps abandon this plan?

I have not yet decided how far back I'm going to go with it, and I'm not planning at the moment to post historical exhibit shots, unless they are conductive to telling a story about a zoo.

 

[Hvedekorn]

I didn't really mean to complain as much as wonder why the uploading tendencies had changed so much during ten years.

I'll admit it's a bit annoying when you're curious about how a zoo's exhibits look like, and you only find page up and page down with close-ups, but that is rarely the case - if a gallery has a lot of close-up photos, it usually also has a lot of exhibit photos.

I like viewing good portrait photos as much as the next person, but a slight issue I take is that if the photo is so close up that you can't see anything of the surroundings (i.e. exhibit), then it doesn't have much value as a zoo photo despite that it might a good portrait photo. So if you're uploading photos of a well-documented zoo such as Chester Zoo or Zurich Zoo, I don't really mind close-ups since there are already photos of every noteworthy exhibit there. If you're uploading photos of a zoo that has none or extremely few photos in the gallery (for example Tierpark Suhl or Wingst Zoo), it might be more relevant to us zoo nerds to upload exhibit photos first.

Anyway, as Sim states, there are no separate galleries for close-ups (because the line betwen portrait and exhibit can sometimes be hard to draw), there are no rules against it, and loads of other users only or mostly upload close-ups, so just upload to your heart's content. (As long as you're following the general upload rules, of course )