Serve scaled images for thumbnails

[Marcel Iseli]

Hi everyone

When checking my website with gtmetrix.com, I get a very bad result with my page. how can I solve that problem with non-scaled images? Can I adjust that 

somewhere in the settings? I would just like to scale down the settings for the thumbnails. it seems they are stored in a new huge size instead of a small resolution (size).

 

if somebody could tell me exactly where to adjust this, that would be great.

 

kind regards

 

Marcel

 

 

 

 

[David..]

IPS needs to update their letter profile photos, there’s a topic about why they’re  so big.

[Marcel Iseli]

that means I can not do it from the backend? and where is that topic if I may ask? Would be nice if you could provide me a link for it

[David..]

1 minute ago, Marcel Iseli said:

that means I can not do it from the backend? and where is that topic if I may ask? Would be nice if you could provide me a link for it

 

[Marcel Iseli]

cant believe that I can not just simply get scaled images from the start..I mean we are in 2018? This makes my site massively slower because it needs to scale every single thumbnail down..

[Silnei L Andrade]

You know the bad news about that? Google strips off slow pages because most searches are done on smartphones and this game is costing me 50% less traffic and also 50% less income from ADsense, I'm having serious problems because of that.

[opentype]

13 minutes ago, Silnei L Andrade said:

You know the bad news about that? Google strips off slow pages because most searches are done on smartphones and this game is costing me 50% less traffic and also 50% less income from ADsense, I'm having serious problems because of that.

Your site speed doesn’t stand and fall with profile images. There are many many variables. If you think profile images are costing you 50% of your income, turn the alphanumeric avatar images off. It’s as simple as that. 

Their size isn’t much of a problem anyway, since most of the pixels have the same color. So compression makes them small, whether they are 100 pixels wide or 500. 
It would indeed be good advise (in regards to speed and ranking) not to have a huge count of images on any page, especially the entry pages. Admins tend to overload those pages with widgets full of images (gallery, profile images, and so on). 

[Silnei L Andrade]

I usually do not use almost any third-party extra plugin to try to keep the site as fast as possible and have no problems updating, but the IPB upload structure needs improvements to do the same thing that social networks do to decrease the maximum the size of the images sent. In my case it has an aggravating because the images posted when the site was in PHPBB. Some are giants and in the IPB there are none, at least that I know that rebuilds all the thumbnails of the entire site so that the images of the topics are loaded as quickly as possible, that's where the problem lives. In wordpress for example there are a multitude of tools to do this. Until a year ago this was not so problematic, but I see this year Goggle has been removing a large number of pages from the content and this is yes because the loading speed is slow. Google is in an open window with Facebook and is losing, searches fall every year and the use of smartphones only increases every day. 55% of my users are already using smartphone. This year they simply lost more than 50% of my indexing pages and not just me, many people here reported the same problem. This is because of the speed of the pages and is a path with no back.

Since December 10:

My IPB Forum:

515.957 > 194.886

My Wordpress Blog:

11.458 > 8.986

 

[opentype]

1 hour ago, Silnei L Andrade said:

This year they simply lost more than 50% of my indexing pages ...This is because of the speed of the pages and is a path with no back.

 

How do you know that speed is the cause? Where does google say that? Without any demonstration, its nothing but an unsupported assertion, just as others are claiming that something must be wrong with the sitemap as a cause. And of course its always the software’s fault. 

[Silnei L Andrade]

I have no interest in accusing the IPB in an empty way, in fact I'm hoping for the IPB to improve.

The 2 sites are on the same server, which is a dedicated server with a good configuration:

Processor : 2 x 2.6GHz Octa-Core E5-2670 Sandy Bridge Xeon
Memory: 64GB
Primary Hard Drive: 960 GB
Second Hard Drive:480 GB
Third Hard Drive: 3 TB
Operating System: CentOS 7.x
Bandwidth: 20TB on 1Gbps port
Internal Network:1 Gbps

The 2 sites talk about the same subject, has the content very similar with the same quality.

In the site with IPB I know there are heavy images in the content as I said before, because they were inherited from PHPBB, but I do not have any IPB tool to improve it.

In the site with Wordpress I have already made this improvement because there are several plugins for this purpose.

On the site with wordpress there is a plugin created with a platform of the own Google called AMP that was created so that smartphones access the site of faster form.

In the site with IPB unfortunately there is nothing like this, so if the page is heavy and has no tool to let it light.

So there are some facts here that might explain why the decline in wordpress indexing was much lower.

[opentype]

9 minutes ago, Silnei L Andrade said:

So there are some facts here that might explain why the decline in wordpress indexing was much lower.

Still nothing but assertions not “facts” about the actual causal connection. And even if your page ranking would get worse because of speed – that doesn’t explain complete delisting. So seeing delisting doesn’t point to speed problems. 

By the way: if you haven’t, try the new Search Console interface. They now give details which sites are actually removed. For the forums I could test myself, removed URLs were actually removed for good reasons, e.g. URL forwarding/duplicate content which doesn’t need to be in the index to begin with but was at some point in the past.  

[Silnei L Andrade]

This prints are from the new Search Console interface:

In the Wordpress site have a informations about improvements because of AMP plugin:

 

In IPB site not:

 

[opentype]

Sure, without AMP, there will be no reports about improvements through AMP. That wasn’t the original claim though. We are not really getting anywhere. 

Maybe it’s better to go back to the original topic of image sizes. 

[Joel R]

One thing to keep in mind: I've heard consistent reports from IPS, here in the community, and with my own site that Google is not indexing huge portions of my website.  Scary, right?

Not really.  It turns out my traffic is steadily increasing over the past year.  And I do every bad thing an admin should not do ... My homepage is loaded with high quality images, I've done zero SEO optimization and keywords, I have tons of overlapping content, yet I have month over month of traffic increase.  

At the end of the day, if Google is indexing the most appropriate and relevant information to show to users and visitors are increasing, I'm okay with them not indexing the literally thousands of extraneous pages that go on.  

Anyways, back to the original topic.  Yes, image optimization is good.  You should do it.  

[Metor]

The attachment system of ipb needs improvement regarding pictures. they don't create thumbnails unless you reduce the image display size. when you look at xenforo they create thumbnails and if you don't insert the image they show the thumbnail under the post and you can choose to post the full pic or thumbnail in the post. 

this is desperately needed for ipb. if you go to my attachments or the attachment manager in ipb backend it takes ages to load all the images since they load the full image instead of a thumbnail. leading to some images that are 2mb being loaded.

this is a major issue. I like this community and this script but I fear if this doesn't get fixed in the future I need to switch if my board gets popular. 

 

[Rhett]

44 minutes ago, Serayah said:

The attachment system of ipb needs improvement regarding pictures. they don't create thumbnails unless you reduce the image display size. when you look at xenforo they create thumbnails and if you don't insert the image they show the thumbnail under the post and you can choose to post the full pic or thumbnail in the post. 

this is desperately needed for ipb. if you go to my attachments or the attachment manager in ipb backend it takes ages to load all the images since they load the full image instead of a thumbnail. leading to some images that are 2mb being loaded.

this is a major issue. I like this community and this script but I fear if this doesn't get fixed in the future I need to switch if my board gets popular. 

 

The options are there, all you need to do is set the display size to what you want, the display size is your thumbnail in this case.  You also need to set the max image size to store, to take that 2MB image down to a proper size of like 300kb. 

 

[Metor]

15 minutes ago, Rhett said:

The options are there, all you need to do is set the display size

Ah thought they kept loading the original picture in attachments even if you reduce the size. sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Metor]

On 3/2/2018 at 11:14 PM, Rhett said:

The options are there, all you need to do is set the display size to what you want, the display size is your thumbnail in this case.  You also need to set the max image size to store, to take that 2MB image down to a proper size of like 300kb. 

 

the reduced image sizes don't get used in the "my attachments" profile area, and  overview files images area though it loads the full image...  I believe. would be nice if it loaded the thumbnail also... if possible in future releases.

thanks @Rhett