Maximum inline image size?

[John Hawkinson]

What's the maximum size image that the forum software will show without scaling it down?

I thought, in the old software, it was 450px (or 449px?). So I make a habit of trying to make sure any screenshots I post are less than that, so readers can see the full image without having to click on it, and so there arent any artifacts in most of the images.

But I've noticed recently that this doesn't seem to work. For instance, today I posted a 440x223px image. But the forum software scales it down to 310x157px to display it.

What are the real thresholds?

[D Fosse]

I have wondered about this too, and posted some test images in the testing forum.

It seems landscape images above 450 pixels are still scaled to 450. But images that are prepared to 450 pixels then get scaled to 310! Why is that?

310, however, is left alone, so that appears to be the practical target size.

Vertically the limit seems to be 600.

[Jacob Bugge]

I presume you know it already, John.

When you upload the image to your/another website and use a link, the width that awakens the scroll bar is somewhere between 510 and 560 px, and the length can be at least 1050 px.

I have never used, and never encountered the actual limitations of, inserting an image.

[D Fosse]

Tangentially: everybody should also be aware that images as directly displayed are untagged, even if a profile is embedded in the submitted file. The profile kicks in when you click to bring up the full version.

At least it works that way in Firefox.

This matters mostly to people with wide gamut monitors, but those with standard gamut might want to keep it in the back of their heads.