Odd Gorham container...?

[GABatGH]

So I've had this a long time and I haven't a clue what it is. If it didn't have the initials I'd guess that it's a pill box but those initials just confound me.

I'm also guessing, and not 100% sure, that this is a Gorham device.

I'm wondering if someone might be able to tell me what the 1360 represents, and about when this thing was made.

Maybe someone could tell me what the initials are for?

Thanks so much for your input :)

[AG2012]

Hi,
I think it is a chrismatory containing chrism oil
I am not familiar with three holy oils names but I suppose that`s the abbreviation for them.
Besides, there is a stylized cross on top lid.
Regards

[AG2012]

There are three oils, abbreviations are common in Latin.
There are many web sites to search for their use and meaning.

[GABatGH]

There are three oils, abbreviations are common in Latin.
There are many web sites to search for their use and meaning.

Well, you showed me!!!

Literally!

LOL

Thanks so much!

[dognose]

See also: http://www.925-1000.com/forum/viewtopic ... 36&t=21408

and: http://www.925-1000.com/forum/viewtopic ... ory#p81270

Your images are way too large. Please keep them to within the 7" (18cm) width limit.

Trev.

[GABatGH]

What is the pixel equivalent of seven inches?

[dognose]

Not a clue, but you need to achieve a reduction of around 30% of your current use.

Trev.

[GABatGH]

I'd need to know the pixel dimensions to adhere to any size constraint. Big for you on your screen will be different for me. Screen size and screen resolution and viewing resolution will play huge factors in this.

[dognose]

Perhaps a more technically-minded member can advise on this?

Trev.

[silverly]

What is the pixel equivalent of seven inches?

Pixels do not have a fixed size. It varies with screen size. A thirty percent reduction in your image size should be enough information to meet the goal.

[silverly]

Make that a reduction to thirty percent of the size you are currently posting.

[GABatGH]

I'm sorry but that's too vague.

If there is a rule for maximum picture size, be it mb/kb or pixel size, please let me know for the next time.

[GABatGH]

What is the pixel equivalent of seven inches?

Pixels do not have a fixed size. It varies with screen size. A thirty percent reduction in your image size should be enough information to meet the goal.

Pixels do not have a fixed size?

That's humor, yes? Of course they do. That's why an image is 800x600 or 1200x800 or 5312x2988. Once they're cropped it's anyone's guess as to what size they'll be.

That's why I ask what is the maximum pixel size they could be, or the maximum mb/kb they could be. If the max is 1000 pixels, I's be happy to meet that rule. If the max is 3mb, I'd be happy to meed that rule.

[silverly]

Yes, I meant at say their size is relative to a screen's resolution. And I'll say no more.

[GABatGH]

Perhaps a more technically-minded member can advise on this?

Trev.

I'd appreciate this.

I know this article exists: http://www.925-1000.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=10. I remember reading it when I joined a few years ago.

"7. Don't be a bandwidth pig, your image should be cropped down to what is important and resized to reasonable dimensions (18 centimeter or 7 inch width maximum)."

That was written Apr 29, 2005. While a rule is a rule, and I'm good with that, there is simply no such thing as a "seven inch picture".

I've got twenty seven inch wide screen monitor running at 1920x1080. I can see two word document pages at 100% side by side. What I see in a photo is a lot different than what a twenty inch monitor sees, regardless of the resolution. That's why a rule on maximum size needs to be a pixel size or a mb/kb size.

[Jag]

Simply check properties for every one elses pictures that are suitable size by looking at Image Info. It looks like most pics are scaled to 786 pixel width. Scaling yours to this or less should work well. So if you need a rule, try 700 - 750 pixels.

[GABatGH]

Since when does "do what everyone else does" make a rule?

[dognose]

Hi GABatGH,

Members are offering their thoughts in an effort to help you, and maybe others. Perhaps a less aggressive attitude will encourage others to add their input.

Trev.

[GABatGH]

I don't think I'm being aggressive at all!

When it's being suggested that picture size is too large I can totally appreciate that, I truly can. I own my own domain.

All I'm looking for is a modern and reasonable rule to abide by. The written rule of "seven inches" was written twelve years ago when the internet was a different beast. In general, at that time most of us were looking at glass tube monitors that were in the fourteen inch range, where screen resolution was typically 800x600 and many people in the US were still connecting with dialup modems. That's not the internet that we have today.

[GABatGH]

I just happen to be over at forum.treefrogtreasures.com, doing research on some old toy soldier figures.

When I went to upload a photo I got this message:

The Dimension limits for this filetype are 1500 x 1100. We were unable to resize your file so you will need to do so manually and upload it again. Your file is currently 3387 x 1693.

I've been doing this for a long time, so I knew what I was about to do so I actually counted. In thirteen mouse clicks I had copied and converted six photos to meet that 1500 x 1100 requirement. It took me less than thirty seconds. If I wasn't counting clicks it would have taken me half the time.

If you're on a Windows computer, I'd be happy to share how to do it.