Do you want a bigger avator?

John Lloyd · Post by **John Lloyd** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:10 am

[quote="Driver"]
Most forums allow 100x100 or even 120x120. Issue with a 60 pixel height is that it prevents any detail to show. Plenty of times I look at one and wonder what the heck they are trying to show. I'd just like the width and the height to be consistent as it's easier. We're already allowing 100 on the width...
[/quote]

For Driver.

bolus · Post by **bolus** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:18 am

Personally, I think a slightly larger one is fine but I'd hate to see the forum turn into a place where signatures and avatars take up half the screen like this
http://cobaltss.net/forums/showthread.php?t=65379

Driver · Post by **Driver** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

I was making a observation. Maybe if people have sizes to compare and realize adding some height isn't going to hurt anything. I fully agree with Bolus about his example on the CobaltSS forum. Those large banners in a person's signatures should be heavily restricted. I even hesitated to put my little Texas Flag horizontal bar in mine, but it's small enough i didn't think people would mind. That large animated one that's floating around here lately isn't a bar, it's a full on banner. I don't much care for but we don't have rules about that.. yet. If 3-4 other regular poster started using them then a more 'formal' policy would be called for I think.

Nothing below is larger than 100x100 and nothing is larger than 4K. Now these are pretty decent avatars, i should know, for the most part I made them and when it comes to those I'm a expert at getting them to look decent this small. Not everyone has my expertise (or a copy of photoshop). Photographs can be much harder as well.

Just to give some examples here's a few.
100x60 (what I beleive we are currently limited by):

|

100x100 (or very close):

|

What about those people that their avatars are "horizontally challenged" and want to go up instead of out? Imagine having to shrink these by nearly half and still getting any details to show... (__ x 100):

|

If you limit height to 60 it really imposes a lot of difficulty for the average person to get a decent looking avatar with minimal hassle, and limits the amount of detail they can show. It's, well... limiting. On another board (I did all those avatars for that board), we limited to 100x100 and a max size of 4kb. I've seen other boards use 110 and 120's but that's getting a little too big for even me.

I vote we go to "squaring up" our boards' avatar possibilities. We've already got 100 wide, let us go 100 high as well. But that's just me, You others probably don't even think about minutia like this. I've had more than one person's avatar here too hard to see clearly though. Thus how I think about it.

ross · Post by **ross** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 8:45 am

I'm happy with 100 x 60 and don't see the need to change this at all.

Post by **Richard Marler** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 10:13 am

I am with Ross on this and, whilst on the general subject, can we reduce the number of stars for certain poster levels, as one of them (I think it is supercharged atom that has 10 stars) seems to take up half the screen.

ross · Post by **ross** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 10:39 am

[quote="Richard Marler"]
I am with Ross on this and, whilst on the general subject, can we reduce the number of stars for certain poster levels, as one of them (I think it is supercharged atom that has 10 stars) seems to take up half the screen.
[/quote]

Yeah, this is something I need to look at.

Cheers, Ross.

John Lloyd · Post by **John Lloyd** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 10:50 am

As the words under the photo are longer why not make the photo the same maximum length? Or for those who want less reduce the amount of words you can put in your avator so that the overall width of the avator is reduced.

wisp · Post by **wisp** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:22 pm

If you don't like looking at the avatars you can tick "Don't show users' avatars" under "Look and Layout Preferences" in your profile to turn them off. After all some of them are quite scary.

1965Cobra427 · Post by **1965Cobra427** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 6:29 pm

[quote="wisp"]
...After all some of them are quite scary.

[/quote]

So true, does anybody really want to see more detail on John's chassis?

Post by **Bruce Fielding** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 6:59 pm

[quote="Ross McWilliam"]
[quote="Richard Marler"]
I am with Ross on this and, whilst on the general subject, can we reduce the number of stars for certain poster levels, as one of them (I think it is supercharged atom that has 10 stars) seems to take up half the screen.
[/quote]

Yeah, this is something I need to look at.

Cheers, Ross.
[/quote]

Just give me other icon options other than stars...

Driver · Post by **Driver** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 9:35 pm

Can we use little Ariel logos? I've seen the two roads disappearing into a "A" on many sites so I don't think it's copyrighted, and even if it is it should be simple enough to get the ok to use.

This one is already the right size (16x16):

John Lloyd · Post by **John Lloyd** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 11:56 pm

[quote="1965Cobra427"]
[quote="wisp"]
...After all some of them are quite scary.

[/quote]

So true, does anybody really want to see more detail on John's chassis?
[/quote]

Yes

My car's lovely and I do clean it

Post by **Alec** » Wed Jul 04, 2007 1:36 am

[quote="Richard Marler"]
I am with Ross on this and, whilst on the general subject, can we reduce the number of stars for certain poster levels, as one of them (I think it is supercharged atom that has 10 stars) seems to take up half the screen.
[/quote]

I'm afraid that's me and I'm the only one with more than 5 stars.

It jumped up to 10 stars in one go and I think it's this that determines the width of the avatar column.

The amount of writing in the avatar doesn't seem to make any difference as it wordwraps if you type more in.

Mine was on two lines until I went to 10 stars and then it fitted on one line as the column width adjusted itself to accommodate them.

[quote="John Lloyd"]
[quote="Driver"]
Most forums allow 100x100 or even 120x120. Issue with a 60 pixel height is that it prevents any detail to show. Plenty of times I look at one and wonder what the heck they are trying to show. I'd just like the width and the height to be consistent as it's easier. We're already allowing 100 on the width...
[/quote]

For Driver.
[/quote]

I'm with Driver on this one for a slightly larger Avatar picture as I use them to immediately identify who's posting.

Mine is 72 x 60 at the moment because it's limited by the height of the 120 x 60 allowed.

Here's how mine would look if the allowed size was increased.

[img width=72 height=60]http://links.pictures.aol.com/pic/67e09 ... 3Ig=_l.jpg[/img] [img width=100 height=84]http://links.pictures.aol.com/pic/67e09 ... 3Ig=_l.jpg[/img] [img width=120 height=100]http://links.pictures.aol.com/pic/67e09 ... 3Ig=_l.jpg[/img]
100 x 60 (now) 100 x 100 120 x 120

1965Cobra427 · Post by **1965Cobra427** » Wed Jul 04, 2007 3:28 am

[quote="John Lloyd"]
[quote="1965Cobra427"]
[quote="wisp"]
...After all some of them are quite scary.

[/quote]

So true, does anybody really want to see more detail on John's chassis?
[/quote]

Yes

My car's lovely and I do clean it

[/quote]

....oops! Thought it must be your car, given your avitar .... my bad. Still, does it really need enlarged? (Sorry might be a poor choice of words)

Driver · Post by **Driver** » Wed Jul 04, 2007 3:35 am

I am also all for keeping avatars as png files. All the better to prevent those animated avatars I find so annoying and distracting.

I also use Avatars to quickly identify who's posting.

Ariel.Club Forum