les-slip-28.jpg


I really like this place. I could have relaxed here for hours.

les-slip-29.jpg


les-slip-30.jpg
 
PL1 said:
View attachment 609473
Click to expand...

Toronto Parks ugly garbage cans strike again! (2nd pic). What a detraction from the space!

The view, with them gone would be much improved. Of course, the park needs garbage cans, but aside from more attractive ones, they ought to be placed by people who look up and see the visual impact of their choice.

I will note again, the use of the dark green for the Muskoka Chairs which reads almost black in the pic is unfortunate. They aren't unattractive, but I feel like a burst of Cormier-worthy colour where those chairs are would do wonders.
 
Bibi L said:
Yeah, I was going to mention that. I hope UrbanToronto can increase the quality.

Are you going to upload all of your older photos to Flickr? Or are they going to stay only on UT? I’ve noticed some older photos have been uploaded already to your Flickr.

Here is a comparison between UrbanToronto’s image quality and Flickr’s image quality. The difference is compressed vs original. Photo by @hawc
Comparison by me.

File size:
UrbanToronto: 429 KB
Flickr: 30.6 MB

UrbanToronto
Flickr

View attachment 601586
Click to expand...
I know that we are a bit limited with the resolution of our imagery, but what you've posted is clearly disingenuous exaggeration for effect, taking a small portion of a larger image and blowing it up to a degree beyond what UrbanToronto users experience on a day-to-day basis.

That said, yup, you're always going to get better image resolution from a service that you pay a lot for. If UrbanToronto started charging similar fees to Flickr so that we could afford the storage space and bandwidth required to host what Flickr hosts, UrbanToronto would be gone, finished, caput. Flickr itself has nearly disappeared from existence twice now, and UrbanToronto is so much more niche, on one hand we would never be able to get enough people to pay for the service, and on the other hand we would lose the ability to track construction in our coverage area because 99% of people would stop posting here. While I am employed by UrbanToronto, and I am therefore a bit biased, I think it's clear that contributors get a pretty incredible package from us… for free.

For clarity re: specs, our software allows for images up to 1280 pixels wide, that's it, sorry to say.

For @hawc who was wondering whether we dip into the UrbanToronto Flickr pool for Daily Photos, yup, I go hunting in there occasionally, but there's usually a backlog of good photography in the Forum that I am normally dealing with first!

42
 
^^^ All very fair points. Agree.

From my perspective I use Flickr now simply because I want to show people on here just how the drone photos look in their full original quality. I think Flickr costs me like $9 a month or something, but it's worth it if it means I can post here. I don't use Flickr for anything else and don't use it as a storage place for my photos, I just use it for here.

But yeah totally get why UrbanToronto can't be a photo hosting site. Each one of those photos I upload is like 70mb. That's a little unrealistic.

Glad they still count for Daily Photo though.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top