I just bought a digital camera and I was playing with it. I took a picture of the Janus sticker on the headlight of my Newport
<img src="http://www.geocities.com/dumpdweller/janusheadlight.jpg">
I just bought a digital camera and I was playing with it. I took a picture of the Janus sticker on the headlight of my Newport
<img src="http://www.geocities.com/dumpdweller/janusheadlight.jpg">
That's super sweeet. This headlights stickers fit it perfectly.
I don't see the photo on mine... just a red X
dammit, it was working earlier
http://www.geocities.com/dumpdweller/janusheadlight.jpg
well, here it is if it still won't work. I keep hitting refresh on my browser and sometimes it shows and sometimes it doesn't
lemme try it again <IMG src="http://www.geocities.com/dumpdweller/janusheadlight.jpg">
Different photohosting sites have different rules.
Some don't allow 'external linking'... as of recently.
nice. looks great.
yeah, i'd have to be that since the code is fine. i guess the way to get around that it so post a link to it rather than embed it into the post - sucks that you have to do that. they were probably losing tons of money in bandwidth fees.
simon
Simon,
I have seen the box with a red X a few times on posts and others raved about the pic. I assumed it was a problem with my browser as I have seen this happen on web site pages from time to time.
If it was irritating enough I would update my copy of Express but I prefer the devil I know.
Ron
Simon,
Just a thought, but I think Fred's pics allways show, you may want to compare code.
Ron
They don't always show... what they will do in some cases is show to some... and not others... and some of the ones I posted didn't even show for me... but they did for others.
Photohosting sites have been changing their rules a lot lately.
I think it is part of the great 'dotcom' collapse... with companies who had gambled and set up internet businesses that have made no money... despite the speculating stock market pumping money into them... now people have gotten scared (for many reasons)... and are demanding some sort of performance.
The hope for us cheapskates to continue to enjoy totally free web useage is the increasingly cheaper memory and computing power... making it cheaper and cheaper for site owners to offer sites without it costing them too much.
I know one site owner who is up to about $100/month... with no income from it.
Some motorcycle sites are going into the tire business to service their customers with a product they buy regularly...for a minimal (??) profit.
Does the army collect dues to pay for the web hosting? Simon posted the monthly numbers-- wow.... a terrabyte of data, or some huge amount of transfers--
Just curious, after reading the 'Dotcom bust" posts.
Fred,
I like your theory but not your reasoning. Or maybe its the other way around. : )
I can right click the little box, then properties, then paste the web address of the file into my browser and see the pic every time. This indicates to me that the hosting site is not restricting access, as the pic displays without any collateral advertising or other junk.
I think it has more to do with how the browser handles the command to embed the image.
Ron
I'm not sure what the problem is, as it seems to happen sporatically, but you can always just post it with the attachment feature if worse comes to worse - that seems to work pretty reliably now.
The correct synatx for posting an image is as follows:
<img src="http://www.domainname.com/photoname.jpg" width="400" height="200">
--
as for your question wayne, there aren't any dues to be a moped army member right now - the requirement is just keeping active and involed with the moped army. the hosting fees are getting to be quite a bit of a cost though. I hope to defer the costs in the future a bit by selling some items like stickers and t-shrits through the website.
one thing i will never do is host banner ads or any other sort of non-moped related ad on the site -- i'll find a way to keep digging up the money before i give in to that.
Simon,
That was so informative, I can't stand it. : )
Your email shows a shaded box which I assume is the size of the picture, with the infamous little box with red X in the upper left corner. Did you receive your training directly from Bill Gates? : )
btw, thanks for maintaining this site, it's great.
Ron
I second that! Best moped site in the world,Simon,thanks to you!
Not necessarily true
Some sites put in language thet PREVENTS the image from being posted on another website.
Whereas you as an individual are still allowed to look at it.
The hoster can control WHERE it appears.
it all has to do with 'protecting' their own turf... and giving benefits to being at their site... so as not to benefit another site.
(this is what people who should know tell me)
Fred,
Not being an html expert, I'll take your word for it. As I said, it doesn't tick me off enough to update my browser.
Ron
ah, but a new browser benefits not only you, but the entire web. as more people continue to start using new browsers and fully support standards (ie5+ / ns6+) then designers and programmers (me!) can start writing just one set of code, instead of work arounds for every browser. supporting standards is a wonderful thing, and everyone that upgrades to a standards supporting browser is helping out the entire web by descreasing the percentage of non standard users and thus decrease the need for clients to demand 4.0 compatability.
what browser do you run anyway ron?
i should of known that it would just try and display the code, my bad. what i mean to say is:
<img src="http://www.domainname.com/photoname.jpg" width="400" height="200">
Simon,
I am not exactly in the dark ages. : )
Internet Explorer 5
5.00.2919.6307
Ron
good, good. You had me scared that you were one of these die hard NS4.x fans that saw no reason to ever run anything else. IE5 is great.
Hey, I'm not technologically impaired!
Now, if only I could run IE5 from DOS..... : )
Ron
Want to post in this forum? We'd love to have you join the discussion, but first: