Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2015 21:30:08 GMT 10
I'm just about to buy this viscount supreme. It looks like it is in excellent original condition. Does any one own this model. I think it is a 13ft. No leaks, original paint. I just have to figure out how to add pictures.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2015 21:48:30 GMT 10
Well. Can't post photos. That's annoying.
|
|
|
|
Post by pisces51 on Apr 4, 2015 22:07:16 GMT 10
G'day wadzy,
Add the photos as an attachment.
Check for the chassis number on the van. It'll be welded on the drawbar just near the jockey wheel somewhere. That will help us to give the van a more accurate date.
cheers,
Al.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mustang on Apr 6, 2015 10:58:43 GMT 10
Well. Can't post photos. That's annoying. Try this Photo Link |
|
|
|
Post by atefooterz on Apr 6, 2015 20:31:23 GMT 10
G'day wadzy, Add the photos as an attachment. Check for the chassis number on the van. It'll be welded on the drawbar just near the jockey wheel somewhere. That will help us to give the van a more accurate date. cheers, Al. The last few days have seen this error `The fprum has exceeded its allocated attatchment limit`The sad part about many uncompressed pics being uploaded. Early style forums picture data bases & cost, like this site, mean that the webby will usually set a a 220- 250KB max size (per picture) limit, to allow more onto the server. |
|
|
|
Post by pisces51 on Apr 6, 2015 20:46:42 GMT 10
Yes, it's always an issue when the forum is overloaded with people using the attachment option. The owner of this forum pays a monthly cost for the attachment function, and late last year increased the payments to pay for a larger 'allowance'. Seems we've already exhausted that allowance, and will have to wait for the next month's allocation.
If people used a photo hosting website instead of the attachment option, it would make life easier for the forum, but people seem to struggle getting the hang of doing it that way.
cheers,
Al.
|
|
|
|
Post by atefooterz on Apr 6, 2015 23:04:56 GMT 10
Yes, it's always an issue when the forum is overloaded with people using the attachment option. The owner of this forum pays a monthly cost for the attachment function, and late last year increased the payments to pay for a larger 'allowance'. Seems we've already exhausted that allowance, and will have to wait for the next month's allocation. If people used a photo hosting website instead of the attachment option, it would make life easier for the forum, but people seem to struggle getting the hang of doing it that way. cheers, Al. Or just change the attach option to only upload smaller pics, the visual quality will look the same to most folks at 2MB or 240KB with the same pixel size of pic, tiz only when you want to print stuff you need the extra clutter. |
|
|
|
Post by Mustang on Apr 8, 2015 17:02:36 GMT 10
Why not ask for some contribution to costs, I pay an annual fee to use other sites?
|
|
|
|
Post by atefooterz on Apr 9, 2015 13:05:43 GMT 10
Why not ask for some contribution to costs, I pay an annual fee to use other sites? In 2015 even editing (compressing) pics on a phone is easy. The number of free hosting sites, creating coded thumbnail galleries to just cut & paste onto a post, like imagebam, upix, etc means that hosting costs stay minimal to moderate* & many of us with zero income and very modest savings, like me and others on fixed incomes will continue. It is not like we can claim site/ emag costs againt our tax to get a refund lol! I ran a very picture intensive site & forum for an actress, over 500 pics all 1.2MB+ HQ mag shoot & events stuff for free using a basic included optus server cable account. * Special interest sites,like this, do not get that many clicks,late last year average was 300 per day & now we are hitting the 500 users a day, celeb sites etc get 10,000 to 100,000 daily clickers and bandwidth hits = expensive and funding required! |
|
