Avatar size increase?

Bob The MonkeyBob The Monkey Registered User regular
Now I fully expect to have a little controversy on this issue, but I think it's about time that the avatar resolution limit got increased to 100x100. The Width of the left column when posting is, I believe, hardcoded to more than that already, so it wouldn't change the formatting of the forum. The increase in image quality you get from making the jump from 64x64 to 100x100 is significant, and the small amount of extra bandwidth wouldn't be a burden on the forum, but on the avatars' hosts.

Now, I appreciate that from a technical perspective I'm more than likely being naive here, and there's more than likely some technical (or other) reason that this hasn't already be changed. However, from my point of view, I'm struggling to see one.

Could somebody tell me why the avatars are being kept at 64x64 and, if there's no good reason, consider the posibility of upping it?

Bob The Monkey on
«1

Posts

  • TubeTube Administrator, ClubPA admin
    edited July 2006
    Because no one cares about your stupid fucking avatar and they're quite big enough already so shut your stupid fucking whore mouth

    Tube on
    Hobnail wrote: »
    This forum has taken everything from me
    This hurts but I deserve it

  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2006
    how come you yell at me when i do that :(

    Look, they're big enough for everyone to be able to tell each other apart without being a drain on my bandwidth (I don't care about yours ;) ), and that makes them peachy keen as far as I'm concerned. Simple functionality, mmmm. Delicious. Giant avatars are stupid.

    And its not like most of you don't go stomping all over the size limits on a regular basis anyway.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • Gabriel_PittGabriel_Pitt (effective against the Irish) Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    I believe that what he meant to say was, 'If it's not broken, why fix it?' Why do we need bigger avatars, and what's the gain?

    Gabriel_Pitt on
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2006
    he wants to show you how pretty he is, Gabriel. Don't be mean :P

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • Bob The MonkeyBob The Monkey Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    I have been raised as part of the simple generation who likes pictures.

    I have a low IQ, you see.

    Bob The Monkey on
  • ImranImran Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    I have been raised as part of the simple generation who likes pictures.

    I have a low IQ, you see.
    Then use a 500x80 sig (which is bigger than 64x64 iconteachvq1.gif) instead of a text one. You can think of it, like, a special avatar or something.

    Imran on
    nanasigsmallerrj4.jpg
  • AroducAroduc regular
    edited July 2006
    Imran wrote:
    I have been raised as part of the simple generation who likes pictures.

    I have a low IQ, you see.
    Then use a 500x80 sig (which is bigger than 64x64 iconteachvq1.gif) instead of a text one. You can think of it, like, a special avatar or something.

    What!? The avatar and sig are holy places. You shouldn't be... creative or anything with them.

    Aroduc on
  • denihilistdenihilist Ancient and Mighty Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited July 2006
    Aroduc's sig is pretty much a shining example of why we don't need larger sigs or avatars on this board.

    denihilist on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    denihilist wrote:
    Aroduc's sig is pretty much a shining example of why we don't need larger sigs or avatars on this board.
    Is it possible to just ban .gifs? :P

    Thanatos on
  • denihilistdenihilist Ancient and Mighty Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited July 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    denihilist wrote:
    Aroduc's sig is pretty much a shining example of why we don't need larger sigs or avatars on this board.
    Is it possible to just ban .gifs? :P
    I use adblock. It works like a champ.

    denihilist on
  • Lucky CynicLucky Cynic Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    denihilist wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    denihilist wrote:
    Aroduc's sig is pretty much a shining example of why we don't need larger sigs or avatars on this board.
    Is it possible to just ban .gifs? :P
    I use adblock. It works like a champ.

    Why! Why is my adblock disabled!!111

    Lucky Cynic on
  • SeñorAmorSeñorAmor !!! Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    denihilist wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    denihilist wrote:
    Aroduc's sig is pretty much a shining example of why we don't need larger sigs or avatars on this board.
    Is it possible to just ban .gifs? :P
    I use adblock. It works like a champ.

    Why! Why is my adblock disabled!!111

    Maybe it fell off a horse?

    SeñorAmor on
  • AroducAroduc regular
    edited July 2006
    denihilist wrote:
    Aroduc's sig is pretty much a shining example of why we don't need larger sigs or avatars on this board.

    Hooray! Attention!

    But honestly, there are those with avatars twice the size of my av, and sig combined. Those with power even. If/when the file size purge comes, I'll go back to normal static stuff. But until that point, I'm going to have fun with it. *shrug*

    Aroduc on
  • denihilistdenihilist Ancient and Mighty Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited July 2006
    I was speaking more about aesthetics and their relationship to aspect ratio than file size so *shrug*

    denihilist on
  • AroducAroduc regular
    edited July 2006
    denihilist wrote:
    I was speaking more about aesthetics and their relationship to aspect ratio than file size so *shrug*

    Oh, well, thank you then. :D

    Aroduc on
  • denihilistdenihilist Ancient and Mighty Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited July 2006
    Aroduc wrote:
    denihilist wrote:
    I was speaking more about aesthetics and their relationship to aspect ratio than file size so *shrug*

    Oh, well, thank you then. :D
    :|

    denihilist on
  • TubeTube Administrator, ClubPA admin
    edited July 2006
    Aroduc wrote:
    denihilist wrote:
    I was speaking more about aesthetics and their relationship to aspect ratio than file size so *shrug*

    Oh, well, thank you then. :D

    deni's post translates as "Aroduc's sig is so hideous that it is a good example of why the forum does not need sigs"

    Tube on
    Hobnail wrote: »
    This forum has taken everything from me
    This hurts but I deserve it

  • anyprophetanyprophet Registered User
    edited July 2006
    The small avatar and sig size is one of the things I absolutely love about this forum. There are certain forums where people have wallpappers in their sig.

    anyprophet on
    chatthreadsig.png
  • AroducAroduc regular
    edited July 2006
    Aroduc wrote:
    denihilist wrote:
    I was speaking more about aesthetics and their relationship to aspect ratio than file size so *shrug*

    Oh, well, thank you then. :D

    deni's post translates as "Aroduc's sig is so hideous that it is a good example of why the forum does not need sigs"

    Awesome!

    Attention. <3

    Aroduc on
  • Target PracticeTarget Practice Registered User
    edited July 2006
    Aroduc wrote:
    denihilist wrote:
    I was speaking more about aesthetics and their relationship to aspect ratio than file size so *shrug*

    Oh, well, thank you then. :D

    deni's post translates as "Aroduc's sig is so hideous that it is a good example of why the forum does not need sigs"
    But he cleared the alpha cache!

    Or whatever it is he's always talking about when telling the rest of us how much our images suck

    Target Practice on
    sig.gif
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2006
    anyprophet wrote:
    The small avatar and sig size is one of the things I absolutely love about this forum. There are certain forums where people have wallpappers in their sig.

    I think I saw that form too. God that was scary. A one line "lol" post and then a 1024 x 768 FF7 wallpaper. 10 times on one page.

    FyreWulff on
  • DeusfauxDeusfaux Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    it was increased once already for those that dont remember

    Deusfaux on
  • SixfortyfiveSixfortyfive Registered User
    edited July 2006
    Aroduc wrote:
    denihilist wrote:
    I was speaking more about aesthetics and their relationship to aspect ratio than file size so *shrug*
    Oh, well, thank you then. :D
    deni's post translates as "Aroduc's sig is so hideous that it is a good example of why the forum does not need sigs"
    But he cleared the alpha cache!

    Or whatever it is he's always talking about when telling the rest of us how much our images suck
    Alpha transparency.

    Half of you guys use that on PNGs when there's absolutely no reason to. Makes the forum look like ass in IE.

    Sixfortyfive on
    poasting something foolishly foolish.
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    edited July 2006
    Aroduc wrote:
    denihilist wrote:
    I was speaking more about aesthetics and their relationship to aspect ratio than file size so *shrug*
    Oh, well, thank you then. :D
    deni's post translates as "Aroduc's sig is so hideous that it is a good example of why the forum does not need sigs"
    But he cleared the alpha cache!

    Or whatever it is he's always talking about when telling the rest of us how much our images suck
    Alpha transparency.

    Half of you guys use that on PNGs when there's absolutely no reason to. Makes the forum look like ass in IE.
    Did it ever occur to you that the folks doing it are purposefully being assholes to the minority (on this forum) who use IE? ;)

    syndalis on
    SW-4158-3990-6116
    Let's play Mario Kart or something...
  • SeñorAmorSeñorAmor !!! Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    Aroduc wrote:
    denihilist wrote:
    I was speaking more about aesthetics and their relationship to aspect ratio than file size so *shrug*
    Oh, well, thank you then. :D
    deni's post translates as "Aroduc's sig is so hideous that it is a good example of why the forum does not need sigs"
    But he cleared the alpha cache!

    Or whatever it is he's always talking about when telling the rest of us how much our images suck
    Alpha transparency.

    Half of you guys use that on PNGs when there's absolutely no reason to. Makes the forum look like ass in IE.

    Stop using IE, retard. :P

    SeñorAmor on
  • SixfortyfiveSixfortyfive Registered User
    edited July 2006
    Aroduc wrote:
    denihilist wrote:
    I was speaking more about aesthetics and their relationship to aspect ratio than file size so *shrug*
    Oh, well, thank you then. :D
    deni's post translates as "Aroduc's sig is so hideous that it is a good example of why the forum does not need sigs"
    But he cleared the alpha cache!

    Or whatever it is he's always talking about when telling the rest of us how much our images suck
    Alpha transparency.

    Half of you guys use that on PNGs when there's absolutely no reason to. Makes the forum look like ass in IE.
    Stop using IE, retard. :P
    I don't use it on my home PC.

    Sixfortyfive on
    poasting something foolishly foolish.
  • Panda4YouPanda4You Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    When we're talking sigs and avatars: I've noticed a slow but steady increase of people having a maxed out image sig and then adding several rows of text onto that. I can't say it's that a big deal, but it really get on my nerves AND I WON'T GET THE FUCKING PILL BOTTTLE REFILLED UNTIL AFTE RTHE WEEKEND FUCK

    Panda4You on
  • HenroidHenroid Seize the Memes Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    I vote we take a step backward and go back to avatars being 40x40.

    Henroid on
    Nobody likes me but that's okay. I'm used to it.
    I stream at night - /henroidt on Twitch
  • SaniusSanius Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    I think our current avatar/sig format works just fine.

    Sanius on
  • NucshNucsh Registered User
    edited July 2006
    Sanius wrote:
    I think our current avatar/sig format works just fine.

    Nucsh on
    [SIGPIC]GIANT ENEMY BEAR[/SIGPIC]
  • KazhiimKazhiim __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2006
    sigs and avatars are pointless.

    So are usernames. We should all go to being "Anonymous"


    hey, it works well for-

    Kazhiim on
    lost_sig2.png
  • FierceDeity666FierceDeity666 Registered User
    edited July 2006
    Nucsh wrote:
    Sanius wrote:
    I think our current avatar/sig format works just fine.

    FierceDeity666 on
  • MonoxideMonoxide Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2006
    I really don't like sigs at all.

    Just throwing that out there.

    Monoxide on
  • Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2006
    All the mods that have posted in this thread think the concept is totally without merit.

    Just_Bri_Thanks on
    We are the skeletons in our closets.
    We are the monsters under our beds.
  • Bionic MonkeyBionic Monkey Registered User, ClubPA
    edited July 2006
    Monoxide wrote:
    I really don't like sigs at all.

    Just throwing that out there.
    The week we went without was actually kind of nice.

    And that was completely unintentional illiteration.

    Bionic Monkey on
    sig_megas_armed.jpg
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2006
    IE7 supports alpha-transparent PNGs.

    And the forums are pratically unbearable on dialup already.

    Also, people with huge sigs are usually from SE++. I believe every other single forum follows the 500x80 rule.

    FyreWulff on
  • ÄlphämönkëyÄlphämönkëy Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    We won't be increasing the avatar size.... uh... anything else? :wink:

    Älphämönkëy on
  • scjohnnoscjohnno Registered User
    edited July 2006
    We won't be increasing the avatar size.... uh... anything else? :wink:
    We demand a Hawaiian shirt day.

    scjohnno on
    ...a doctrine which may, I fear, appear wildly paradoxical and subversive. The doctrine in question is this: that it is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true. I must, of course, admit that if such an opinion became common it would completely transform our social life and our political system; since both are at present faultless, this must weigh against it. - Bertrand Russell
  • ÄlphämönkëyÄlphämönkëy Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    scjohnno wrote:
    We won't be increasing the avatar size.... uh... anything else? :wink:
    We demand a Hawaiian shirt day.
    Be very careful in what you wish for :wink:

    Älphämönkëy on
  • DeusfauxDeusfaux Registered User regular
    edited July 2006
    We won't be increasing the avatar size.... uh... anything else? :wink:

    I have a few requests... but I'm still under the impression you're not ready for such things

    Deusfaux on
This discussion has been closed.