|
|
Post by Dashe on Nov 9, 2009 15:49:36 GMT -5
It's been brought to my attention that a decent number of you are exceeding the MMLS custom avatar and signature size limits. There are still dial-up users on this board, so please be considerate of your file sizes. On November 16th, Chiz will be handing out mass notifications to all parties with oversized signatures and custom avatars. If you have an oversized avatar or signature now and fix it before the 16th, you'll get out of jail free, so to speak. If you're not sure, right-click the images and check the properties. The maximum size for avatars is 100x100 pixels and 50 kiB...  ...and the maximum COMBINED size for all items as they are arranged in your signature is 500x150 px and 50kiB. Basically, they should all fit in an imaginary box of this size (see below).  Thank you for your cooperation regarding this matter. |
|
|
|
Post by in·clover on Nov 9, 2009 16:31:58 GMT -5
WELL FINE SCREW YOU GUYS That sucks. I love my sig.  What if I shrunk it so it was slightly above the size requirement? I mean, I was unaware there even was a limit on this to begin with. Pretty sure I glossed over the rules just to be safe, too. Btw, it's not possible to have a custom avatar over 100x100 pixels. ...right? |
|
|
|
Post by Pitch on Nov 9, 2009 16:47:35 GMT -5
@avatars What B-R-E-T said. Physical dimensions of avatars shouldn't matter because the HTML resizes them anyway*. Filesize is what's killing people with slow connections. Similarly, physical dimensions of signatures should matter a bit less, provided they're under 50kB**, unless the real concern is that people have lower screen resolutions. But I'm not complaining. I don't know if I've ever been over the limit, to be perfectly honest. o__o * On the other hand HTML does a lousy job resizing images, so they often look ugly when people use them. The image itself isn't changed in any way, it just squishes the pixels together. x__x Would you believe some people have complained about that? 
** kiB is a silly term. This dispute over what constitutes a "kilobyte" is complete nonsense. Say “kibi-byte” out loud. I dare you.  |
|
|
|
Post by mirak on Nov 9, 2009 17:12:20 GMT -5
Oh look more rule reminders, gotta love those. lol
I remember once that EC PM'd me about my signature image having too many colors and that because of that it made it slightly bigger than the limit, so he gave me a low resolution version of my sig that looked like crap, nedless to say i used it for two days and then i changed the sig, which was again above the limit and nobody told me anything. What.
Anyway it seems that i'm free of guilt this time soooooo buh bye b-r-e-t's sig, it was nice meeting you even though your context freaked me out.
EDIT: LOL BRET WTF
|
|
|
|
Post by in·clover on Nov 9, 2009 18:30:04 GMT -5
I don't understand why this bothers you guys so much. Everybody on these boards does an impeccable job keeping their avatars and sigs reasonably sized, and it's not an actual problem worthy of cracking down on. |
|
|
|
Post by mirak on Nov 9, 2009 19:10:03 GMT -5
There are still dial-up users on this board. I'm a bit curious, who are they? |
|
|
|
Post by Dashe on Nov 9, 2009 19:28:01 GMT -5
Major does, that I know of for sure. Chiz has the tally of who's got it and who doesn't. I know I had it up until 2007 and it made looking at stuff on this site a total nightmare, and fab had it for longer than I did. I'd actually wanted to lighten up on that one, mostly because I haven't the time or energy to actually go and check every one of them like Chiz does, believe it or not, but the proposition was turned down in the end.
I do think sigs look a lot cleaner if they're confined to a rectangular template. It is a rule, too. Minor Infraction 05.
|
|
|
|
Post by mirak on Nov 9, 2009 19:55:37 GMT -5
It is a major comfort knowing that even a humble mexican like me overpowers people from better countries in terms of internet connection.
What, i find your remark extremely racist against circles, triangles and tetrahedrons.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dashe on Nov 9, 2009 23:10:32 GMT -5
Ah, come off it Mir@k! Everyone's a little bit racist...
|
|
MayImilae
Zakobon
Badgeless, and proud of it!
Posts: 145 
|
Post by MayImilae on Nov 9, 2009 23:51:05 GMT -5
*Dialup modem squeals in glee during connecting*
What the... Oh sweet. Someone remembered the dialup users. *sniff* Thanks guys.
Now if the rest of the whole internet would just remember us, dialup might be tolerable!
I know... I used to know someone from a village shack in India that had better internet then I do. Didn't even have indoor plumbing or air conditioning, and had better net then mine. What a world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chiz on Nov 11, 2009 7:14:56 GMT -5
Btw, it's not possible to have a custom avatar over 100x100 pixels. ...right? Physical dimensions of avatars shouldn't matter because the HTML resizes them anyway* * On the other hand HTML does a lousy job resizing images, so they often look ugly when people use them. The image itself isn't changed in any way, it just squishes the pixels together. x__x Would you believe some people have complained about that? As a consequence, I've never handed out a warning for having an avatar bigger than 100x100 (although, the larger the resolution, the greater chance you run of having said file being over 50KiB). Also, how good an avatar looks isn't against the rules, as long as it doesn't violate any of the content rules (such as maturity, etc). No one is forcing anyone to use the template avatar/signature images, but it's not against the rules, so it's your prerogative if you want to do this. Everybody on these boards does an impeccable job keeping their avatars and sigs reasonably sized, and it's not an actual problem worthy of cracking down on. That makes my job really easy then, doesn't it?  PS: I do say Kibibyte, Mebibyte, Gibibyte, etc, when making a point of it. I usually use "True Kilobyte, etc" or "Binary Kilobyte, etc", though, because my aim is to clarify, not confuse  |
|
|
|
Post by Musashi on Nov 11, 2009 14:00:48 GMT -5
Well, considering my broken-image avatar is 0kb, and I kind of like it...despite it being just a broken JPEG, I'm gonna keep it! So I'm in the clear, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by in·clover on Nov 11, 2009 18:46:17 GMT -5
What kind of irked me earlier was that I went to the trouble of ripping the white channels from the image and tediously cleaned it up so it would have a nice transparent, non distracting appearance to begin with, and now shrinking it any smaller than this ruins the awesome screentoning job the artist did. So... meh. Hope this works for you. It is only slightly bigger than the template.
|
|
|
|
Post by smokeeye123 on Jul 25, 2010 17:57:02 GMT -5
It's been brought to my attention that a decent number of you are exceeding the MMLS custom avatar and signature size limits. There are still dial-up users on this board, so please be considerate of your file sizes. On November 16th, Chiz will be handing out mass notifications to all parties with oversized signatures and custom avatars. If you have an oversized avatar or signature now and fix it before the 16th, you'll get out of jail free, so to speak. If you're not sure, right-click the images and check the properties. The maximum size for avatars is 100x100 pixels and 50 kiB... ...and the maximum COMBINED size for all items as they are arranged in your signature is 500x150 px and 50kiB. Basically, they should all fit in an imaginary box of this size (see below). Thank you for your cooperation regarding this matter. Honestly, I don't think the entire forum should have to be under strict rules just to have the 1 or 2 people who probably don't even come on the forum that often browse faster. I mean...It's 2010, not 1997. |
|
|
|
Post by Pitch on Jul 25, 2010 18:13:00 GMT -5
Blah.
A signature exceeding those dimensions looks obnoxious, regardless of whether you're on a large widescreen monitor/connecting over a highspeed connection anyway. And the limit on avatar dimensions is automatically and irrevocably enforced by Proboards itself as it is, so using a large image for an avatar is pointless.
|
|
