I'd second photobucket, I always upload there at 800 wide just for sharing on forums. They also have a password locked album option which came in useful recently for sharing a whole set of photos without getting muddled with all my other images.

I've never experienced any bandwidth issues or downtime with them & best of all they're free.

Bob

Feeb, there isn't an issue with the hover function not working, it's just that on a smaller screen you can't see the enlarged image in full when you have scrolled down the page to hover on the lower images. You need to get the enlarged image to scroll down the page with you somehow.
As I said it's fine on my main larger monitor, but you need to cater for the world at large. I think web design is becoming more difficult due to the difference in display sizes and aspect ratios around, not to mention so many mainstream browsers to cater for.

Mike I've just checked it in Chrome & it's working fine. There are more different images in the "Prints" tab.

I also went for the cranes, not such an extreme crop as epiphet man though.

[IMG]http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q105/RR76/conv.jpg[/IMG]

Mike, the white balance seems to be off a little on that pic & it is showing a slight magenta cast so it's not your monitor.

Plus, just for you is a classic example of purple fringing:

It seems to be optomised for 1280x800 (judging by background image size)
However at this resolution (on my secondary display) using the HOVER method is ok for the top rows of images, but if I want to hover over the last 2 rows then I cannot see the whole of the larger pop-up image as I have to scroll down to hover.

On my main display there is plenty of room for the image to be displayed due to higher resolution giving more area. The problem then however is that the background image only covers part of the background & looks a little out of sorts.

I used firefox by the way.

It looks pretty professional, but is not up to the standard of the wonderful images you have displayed there.

Plus, I couldn't find the actual print dimensions anywhere. I don't think I'd send £25 for a small print, in case I recieved a postage stamp sized photo !

EDIT: re-reading my post it sounded far too negative, the images are by-and-large fantastic & with a few tweaks the website will look great too. Just trying to be constructive

I can't see the image in your post. Is this what you're trying to do ?




This one is 1000 wide as you uploaded I suspect. Add an 800 wide to the gallery (maximum size for fortnightly competition) otherwise 1000 is fine for general uploads.

To link to it, go to your photo in the gallery & click on the photo so that it shows the large version. Then right click on the large version & select "properties" to find the url of that large image. (Remember that 800 along the longest side is the largest allowed for the fortnightly comp)

I hope you followed ok. Bob

All the more reason not to have an empty photography fund when it's announced !

I realise that wider apertures would have limited practical use, but I always crave a bright viewfinder. In the unlikely event that you still have it for sale when I'm dissapointed by the new body specs then I'll be in touch

I'm very tempted by this Richard, but have vowed to curb my LBA until the "K7D" announcement. I suspect I'll be better served by buying quality lenses, but I am hopeful for a true innovation.

The Tamron looks significantly sharper at wider apertures than the Sigma equivalent.

John, this appears in the thread entitled "Fortnightly Competition Rules"

2. Full Exif data should be supplied with each image, including date/time of capture;

I'm pretty sure I saw these sell on ebay just after the posting date. Sounds as if you'll need to find a Nikon Forum to find him again !