BTW, this is what I get if I open up one of those pics and stretch the browser window across BOTH monitors (a combined width of 2464 pixels, and in this case a height of approx 1100 - Chrome/Win7(?) played its face and wouldn't let me drag the top of the window any higher).
(Resized to 5/16ths aka 1/3.2 aka about 31%. The light grey blocks are the vertical areas that don't exist on the widescreen monitor, but do on the portrait one)
There is also, if the resizing has made it indistinct, a horizontal scrollbar at the bottom of the window, which I have scrolled all the way right because for some reason there's several hundred pixels of left-hand border added whether we like it/it's necessary or not.
Saving the picture shows it's a slightly oddball 1900x1200 resolution (I guess 1920x1200 accidentally cropped down), and a further non-screenshotted experiment with the right-hand monitor alone (which is 1024x1280) suggests that, yes, it's being shown at 1:1 size, as I can fit the entire height within a fullscreened browser... just. This also means that, as I had to scroll horizontally to see the right-hand edge of a 1900-pixel image within a nearly 2500-pixel display, there must be at LEAST 600 pixels of left-hand border added.
In a world where most people are still using displays in the 1280x800 thru 1440x900 range, with a growing but relatively small number of 1920x1080s (stuff like Apple Cinemadisplays or 2K+ retina panels are still in the luxury class), don'tcha think it's a bit excessive to a/ show an image of that size at 1:1 with no resizing option (most websites these days seem to have figured out the whole "auto resize to fit" thing), b/ add on a compulsory border that's almost half the width of the smaller monitor, more than 40% that of the larger common one, and still about 30% of the largest general purpose models (HDTV and iPad) on the left hand side ALONE?
Note that my portrait monitor itself has more vertical resolution than any common size short of a "cinema" or "retina" display, but I still had to fullscreen it to fit the full picture height. With the tab and address bar, it might have just about scraped right up to the edge. With the download bar as well (which happens to be showing right now)? No chance. Nor with an actual 1200-line monitor (or home cinema projector...), or a 1080p.
Oh, and of course, there's all that business with the sidebar. That shit should sit NEXT TO any images you're displaying, not on top of. If I break out the ruler on my shrunken image, the gap between the white strip and the sidebar - even though the latter is straddling both monitors - is about 207 pixels. Or scaling up, about 663 at full size. You're really going to carry on with a fixed width content column like that, which can only really show a VGA-resolution image with a modest whitespace border... and that's a full-column-width text-stopper?
Hmmm. Right. OK.
(Cuh, eh!)
BTW, please please please please please can you fix it for us to not have to suffer loud blaring video ads that lurk at the BOTTOM of discussion thread pages, so we can be free of the sequential games of "hunt the tab" and then "hunt the culprit within the tab". Just FYI, every time I'm bothered by one of those mother-effers, my desire to buy anything from the company behind the campaign drops in an exponential fashion, and my desire to buy my next example of said product from their main rival rises.
