103 replies to this topic

[Loaf]

I love my avatar. I can show off an animation, or an image a friend has made me. Currently, because of the nature of my sig, it is dwarfed to nearly thumbnail size. I find it wasteful. I also see a lot of other nice avatars that have lost their value because of the new changes. I want to know your opinion. (I'm probably alone on this one)

[Zezuken]

Ya it should be made bigger imo, 100*100 would do nicely.

[Stubbjax]

Increasing the size will only lead to problems for users with a slow Internet, for example, dial-up. It would take too long just to load a single page, and for not much benefit. So what if you can see the avatar a bit more clearly?

Edited by stubbjax02, 24 March 2008 - 06:25 AM.

[Loaf]

Then get rid of long gifs.
Another thing is that in the country, more people have broadband then dialup according to a national poll.

[Zezuken]

The size of it shouldn't matter for lagging dial up, we already have a file size to follow.

[Loaf]

Yes.

[Stubbjax]

The size of it shouldn't matter for lagging dial up, we already have a file size to follow.

I didn't mean file size, I meant image size!

[Zezuken]

The size of it shouldn't matter for lagging dial up, we already have a file size to follow.

I didn't mean file size, I meant image size!

Well then you don't make sense, it won't take longer to load if the image size is larger and the file size is smaller.

[Stubbjax]

The size of it shouldn't matter for lagging dial up, we already have a file size to follow.

I didn't mean file size, I meant image size!

Well then you don't make sense, it won't take longer to load if the image size is larger and the file size is smaller.

Simple, larger image size = larger file size.

[SuperCasey4]

I think its fine the way it is, we already have plenty of room in our signature for stuff, and bigger avatars would just make the forum look messy.

[Zezuken]

The size of it shouldn't matter for lagging dial up, we already have a file size to follow.

I didn't mean file size, I meant image size!

Well then you don't make sense, it won't take longer to load if the image size is larger and the file size is smaller.

Simple, larger image size = larger file size.

ya exactly, so why don't we just have a larger image size?

[Stubbjax]

The size of it shouldn't matter for lagging dial up, we already have a file size to follow.

I didn't mean file size, I meant image size!

Well then you don't make sense, it won't take longer to load if the image size is larger and the file size is smaller.

Simple, larger image size = larger file size.

ya exactly, so why don't we just have a larger image size?

Because that would increase the file size.

[Natso]

The size of it shouldn't matter for lagging dial up, we already have a file size to follow.

I didn't mean file size, I meant image size!

Well then you don't make sense, it won't take longer to load if the image size is larger and the file size is smaller.

Simple, larger image size = larger file size.

ya exactly, so why don't we just have a larger image size?

Because that would increase the file size.

Get your terminology right.

"Larger image size" = Greater image dimensions

Just because one image is 80x80 and another is 100x100 doesn't mean that the 100x100 takes up more memory than an 80x80! This is absolutely absurd, and you should probably go back to your image export menu before continuing this conversation.

Increasing the dimensions of the avatars on this forum only proposes TWO PROBLEMS:

1. will they fit nicely into the new forum skin
2. are the user's that willing to give more room for annoying members to post flashy and generally annoying avatars and further corrupt member's minds

I personally say no to both, but I also say that the "arguments" in the preceeding posts are complete gibberish and nonsense.

Cheers,
- Natso

[FredFredrickson]

Avatars are not supposed to be anything but a thumbnail. What can you do with a 100x100 image that you can't do with 80x80 (or whatever the limit is right now)?

[Stubbjax]

The size of it shouldn't matter for lagging dial up, we already have a file size to follow.

I didn't mean file size, I meant image size!

Well then you don't make sense, it won't take longer to load if the image size is larger and the file size is smaller.

Simple, larger image size = larger file size.

ya exactly, so why don't we just have a larger image size?

Because that would increase the file size.

Get your terminology right.

"Larger image size" = Greater image dimensions

Just because one image is 80x80 and another is 100x100 doesn't mean that the 100x100 takes up more memory than an 80x80!

I meant if we just resized our current ones.

[grandhighgamer]

Large avatars made the place look even more retarded and people start putting dumb-ass macros for avatars.

I suppose I'd bend to 80x80px... no more than that though...

Edited by grandhighgamer, 24 March 2008 - 09:24 AM.

[-Oakleaf-]

I personally don't see anything useful in enlargening(?) the avatar size. It is just a picture...

[Uber-Angus]

I'd like 100x100. Since the avatar I'm currently using is 100x100, I'd like people to see it better.

~ Angus

[Unib5]

100x100 is too big. I think the limit should be 80x80.

[Uber-Angus]

100x100 is a lot more common than 80x80 though.

~ Angus