OffTopic
Lol messed up
i mean the image size is bigger but the quality the same and when i take a screen with ctrl+s is about 3.xx bytes and when i take it with prtscr is about 1.xx (2mb difference) bytes and its a lot of work when i take more than 1 screen and need to compress it to upload it in websites that the most have 2mb allowed image space.The image in the attachment is 1.85 mb with prtscr and with control+s is 3.75 that i CANT upload it here (needs compress)

Yeah, but that's because with PrtScr you paste it into an image editing program and save it as PNG, which uses lossless compression resulting in a smaller filesize without quality loss. When posting stuff on the web you should use JPEG anyway, since the file size will be smaller by an order of magnitude compared to PNG. The only exception for that is simple graphics (few colours used and large areas having the same colour) and/or pictures where the quality is of utmost importance.

Quote from BOSCHO :

OffTopic
Lol messed up
i mean the image size is bigger but the quality the same and when i take a screen with ctrl+s is about 3.xx bytes and when i take it with prtscr is about 1.xx (2mb difference) bytes and its a lot of work when i take more than 1 screen and need to compress it to upload it in websites that the most have 2mb allowed image space.The image in the attachment is 1.85 mb with prtscr and with control+s is 3.75 that i CANT upload it here (needs compress)

This is going way offtopic, but:
1. It's kind of your fault if you are using something other than the built-in feature (Ctrl+S)
2. Don't use PNGs for LFS screenshots, they are huge. The example you posted is almost 2MB which is massive. You should use JPG instead. That image would probably go down to 200KB or something and the quality loss would be almost invisible.
3. There are batch converters for images availabe which can compress the whole folder of images with a few clicks. I prefer IrfanView.

As an example, I changed your picture to jpg, without doing anything else to it at all.

Quote from geeman1 :

2. Don't use PNGs for LFS screenshots, they are huge.

Not always.

Yeah, if you screenshot a pitch black area then they would not be huge :rolleyes:
They will be huge if the picture contains lots of detail, which screenshots tend to have.

Nah the best screenshooter is DXRipper.

You can change resolution/textures/objects etc before rendering the final shot as JPG.

Quote from Shadowww :

Not always.

I can't imagine any situation where that wouldn't be the case. Even if such situation exists a JPG would be reasonably small anyway.

Quote from geeman1 :

I can't imagine any situation where that wouldn't be the case. Even if such situation exists a JPG would be reasonably small anyway.

Reasonably small? 33kb PNG, 200kb JPG. Not LFS screenshot, but still.

Quote from Shadowww :

Reasonably small? 33kb PNG, 200kb JPG. Not LFS screenshot, but still.

Yeah. PNG is better and smaller for certain types of pictures, but LFS screenshots are not one of those types. I didn't mean JPGs are always better for all images.

Check out this url http://www.r1ch.net/img-formats/ (there is a conclusion at the end for lazy people)

png is for transparent backgrounds and jpg for the rest

Quote from BOSCHO :

png is for transparent backgrounds and jpg for the rest

Wrong. Would you screenshoot some application to PNG? That's just dumb.

Quote from Shadowww :

Wrong. Would you screenshoot some application to PNG? That's just dumb.

for image editing only like my avatar i made it with transparent background

Quote from BOSCHO :

for image editing only like my avatar i made it with transparent background

Try saving this picture as JPG and look at it's size.

no big diff same quality..
ps: too much offtopic

Quote from BOSCHO :

no big diff same quality..

Same quality? Post teh jpg here.

Quote from Shadowww :

Same quality? Post teh jpg here.

if you zoom it you can see the diff but in original size they are the same

You can see the diff quite clearly without zooming in and both JPEGs are larger than the PNG. Since this screenshot has lots of large uniform spaces the PNG's compression can work better here.

Quote from AndroidXP :

You can see the diff quite clearly without zooming in and both JPEGs are larger than the PNG. Since this screenshot has lots of large uniform spaces the PNG's compression can work better here.

ya the color of the jpg's is more... uncolored

Quote from Shadowww :

Try saving this picture as JPG and look at it's size.

Look, only 47KB!

Quote from pik_d :

Look, only 47KB!

Look, only 29kb!

Came to LFS forum, got excited and clicked the new patch URL.

Sad panda is sad, VWS w/out new tyre physics would be a treat for all before it gets boring w/the new physics, let us get bored of it with the old so when every cars new....

Make sense? Yes it does! Very much sense that it'd be a HUGE change in LFS, then the new tyre physics would be even more amazing whenever launched.

I'm tired and bored of all the current LFS cars, with new tyre phy they'd be nice because the handling is horribly unrealistic sometimes (XRT w/mouse I can HARDLY control, yet I can XRR no prob and XRG) people say mouse is faster, well I'm pretty damn good at mouse though I don't do real "racing" on LFS I find XRT just burns up tires, etc.

Oh and I'll post a new feature thingy.

Quote :

ws.c server is getting a lot of x16 disconnects. all at once and it looks like its every one that is on x16

WS.C sucks, bunch of kids so what big deal is that?

Quote from cmanns :

Came to LFS forum, got excited and clicked the new patch URL.

Sad panda is sad, VWS w/out new tyre physics would be a treat for all before it gets boring w/the new physics, let us get bored of it with the old so when every cars new....

Make sense? Yes it does! Very much sense that it'd be a HUGE change in LFS, then the new tyre physics would be even more amazing whenever launched.

I'm tired and bored of all the current LFS cars, with new tyre phy they'd be nice because the handling is horribly unrealistic sometimes (XRT w/mouse I can HARDLY control, yet I can XRR no prob and XRG) people say mouse is faster, well I'm pretty damn good at mouse though I don't do real "racing" on LFS I find XRT just burns up tires, etc.

Oh and I'll post a new feature thingy.


WS.C sucks, bunch of kids so what big deal is that?

that coming from someone conpairing a gt car on street tires to a full gtr car on slicks duh there different. facepalm.jpg

Quote from cmanns :

WS.C sucks, bunch of kids so what big deal is that?

You misspelled "LTC", Sir.

I don't know if this is the right place but what i would like to see is when changing gears the driver moves a gear shift leaver
its just a thought and I dont care if anyone diasagress