Avatar Size

[Minoc]

The current 65x65 limit is just too small, and there is no reason to keep it that way.
I believe it should be increased to at least 120x120 - 150x150.

[Myukoi]

Me too, and remove the whole 10 letters thing.

[osrs]

Yes, it should be revised. The posts should be in a whole page too, like before, not in blocks.

[Nappa]

Aye me matey.

[Ningnong]

*Agrees* I had to keep resizing my avatar to get it to work :|

[Loriel]

I disagree. I do not want so much graphical bloat, I just want to read the posts...
65x65 is more than enough.

[Zero Hour]

Yea, I think that 65 isn't bad, perhaps 100x100? That's a nice even number, and it's a comprimise.

[Ningnong]

Originally Posted by Loriel

I disagree. I do not want so much graphical bloat, I just want to read the posts...
65x65 is more than enough.

Never thought of that, probably because Im on a fast connection but for people with a slower connection could slow them down.

I still think we could increase it just a touch, I searched for avatars on google and like I picked the smallest one (every image had a small, med and large size) and I still needed to resize for graal forums.

[GrowlZ1010]

Originally Posted by Loriel

I disagree. I do not want so much graphical bloat, I just want to read the posts...

Well, there is the option to turn off avatars altogether in the User Control Panel, and if you're looking to just read the posts, it could come in handy. 100x100 or 128x128 sound like reasonable enhancements to me.

[Minoc]

Originally Posted by Ningnong

Never thought of that, probably because Im on a fast connection but for people with a slower connection could slow them down.

Hardly, since the text is loaded first.

[Minoc]

Originally Posted by GrowlZ1010

100x100 or 128x128 sound like reasonable enhancements to me.

128x128 is a standard, so that might be the best choice.

[Loriel]

What kind of standard?

[galen]

You guys are going to have to convince Unixmad to make any chagnes. I can't make any board setting modifications because of some admin panel restrictions or something. I can't even see the settings anymore. oh well

[Minoc]

Originally Posted by Loriel

What kind of standard?

128x128 is just common on many boards. :x

Originally Posted by galen

You guys are going to have to convince Unixmad to make any chagnes. I can't make any board setting modifications because of some admin panel restrictions or something. I can't even see the settings anymore. oh well

Galen, since you're one of the few that could actually contact unixmad..

[Dach]

Originally Posted by Minoc

Hardly, since the text is loaded first.

slows me down nonetheless, order doesn't matter to a bad connection

[Milkdude99]

Originally Posted by Minoc

128x128 is just common on many boards. :x

Galen, since you're one of the few that could actually contact unixmad..

What Boards? , it's a avatar not a Billboard sign.

[Spark910]

Originally Posted by Milkdude99

What Boards? , it's a avatar not a Billboard sign.

Well on these forums it would be okay, considering the left frame of the table is so big anyway.

[GoZelda]

What do we need avatars for anyway? We got sigs already.

[Myomoto]

They are fine as they are, no need to lag people up with giant avatars ;O

[Scott]

Nay. I dislike seeing huge avatars, because most of them are bloody ugly. No need for your fashion statements.

[Projectshifter]

Originally Posted by Myukoi

Me too, and remove the whole 10 letters thing.

I still have no idea what this 10 letter thing is?
-Projectshifter

[Scott]

Originally Posted by Projectshifter

I still have no idea what this 10 letter thing is?
-Projectshifter

It's about as annoying as you putting "-Projectshifter" at the end of all your posts.

The "Ten character limit" is a feature with vBulletin that prevents users from posting messages under the length of 10 characters.

[nonis]

i agree =D

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by Scott

The "Ten character limit" is a feature with vBulletin that prevents users from posting messages under the length of 10 characters.

..which reduces spam and people pointing just to raise their post count. I do think the avatar size should be revised but I don't think the 10 character post should be.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by Rufus

..which reduces spam and people pointing just to raise their post count.

Thanks Captain Obvious.

[Damix2]

Originally Posted by Scott

Thanks Captain Obvious.

aftershock =(

[Scott]

Originally Posted by Damix2

aftershock =(

Internet =(

[Raelyn]

Actually the filesize is what hurts. There is no way I'll get this avatar down to 19kb. :

[Goboom]

Pixelation uses 100x100, and it works just fine.
BTW PS...NICE Avatar.

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by Goboom

Pixelation uses 100x100, and it works just fine.
BTW PS...NICE Avatar.

It works fine because everyone on pixelation has *good* avatars. All the ones, well most anyways, suck.

[Thought]

If you increase size limits, decrease file limit.

[Minoc]

Originally Posted by Raelyn

Actually the filesize is what hurts. There is no way I'll get this avatar down to 19kb. :

Getting a 40kb file hosted isn't that complicated.

[Geno]

aye bigger avatar = more love

[Raelyn]

No, the problem is, I put it on ftp, and it won't let me make a link to the avatar even on my ftp, it still says the file is too big.

[Scott]

It's fine the way is.

[Raelyn]

I wasted my time making it specifically to fit in the avatar portion of the page, not the sig portion, if I knew it wouldn't fit in the avatar part I prolly woulda made a banner or something.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by Raelyn

I wasted my time making it specifically to fit in the avatar portion of the page, not the sig portion, if I knew it wouldn't fit in the avatar part I prolly woulda made a banner or something.

ONOES WORLD COMES 2 ENDZ.

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by Raelyn

No, the problem is, I put it on ftp, and it won't let me make a link to the avatar even on my ftp, it still says the file is too big.

You are not understanding what the avatar selector is doing. It actually goes out and feteches the image from the URL that you specify. Then it saves it to the server's hard disk.

It is *not* just linking to the URL.

[Raelyn]

Yes, but it allows it to fit in signature, so why not just put it in the avatar spot instead? It's under 65x65, so if it's going to be on my sig already, what's the difference?

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by Raelyn

Yes, but it allows it to fit in signature, so why not just put it in the avatar spot instead? It's under 65x65, so if it's going to be on my sig already, what's the difference?

Because it is loading from your server when it is in your signature. Not Graal's.

Go read up on bandwidth.