Maximum signature dimensions

Originally Posted by Kaleb.G

Because your sig was up for an entire month. That's a major infraction!

The fact that it was up for a month with no warning or anything, would logically be assumed (By me at least) that "Ok, my signature is fine, no rule violation, sunshine and a day at the beach!". If there was an infraction, it should have been addressed much sooner then an entire month. That is the problem I have.

Originally Posted by Lord Styphon

If the limits were meant to allow two images that could each be up to 550 pixels wide and 300 pixels high, it would stretch the tables on a 800x600 display, would it not?

OH SHI--

LOGIC!

...Well no denying the truth. I shall shut up about that then >_>
Curiously, how many users here still have 800x600 sized monitors? I figured the average would be 1024x768 or 1280x1024. ...but whatever: I had a HUEG signature, and now I don't

FELIPE NO

It's not that we were picking on you or anything. It's just that you flew under the radar for a very long while until recently.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by Elixir

I'd like to know just how many people on Gamingforce download under 1mbps. I think this thread indicates that there are little members who have 56k or a slow connection speed. This means that 75k per signature wouldn't be a pain for most people, or the majority.

I have a quite fast connection, however that doesn't mean I want to download gigabytes of shitty animated signatures per year. In principle.

That said, 75 kilobytes would be okay. It's not too much of an increase, and would be reasonable, considering that the 50 kb limit was set many years ago.

How ya doing, buddy?

I thought the 50kB limit was mostly a safeguard so we don't end up with thousands of annoying animated GIFs in signatures all over the place.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Like that annoying kirby sig acer had a long time ago. =p

Anyways, if Aardu-chan is ok with an increase to 75kb then so am I.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

I bet if it was Tails instead of Kirby then you wouldn't have any problem with it. =p

So that's a yes for 75kb sigs from Miles, Aardy, and myself. Who else on staff says "Aye!"?

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

The rest of the staff sayz: "lol it's pretty damn easy to reduce 25kb off your image and still keep it in good quality."

And anything animated in a signature is annoying period. Including something with Tails. =p

I was speaking idiomatically.

It could be worse. HTML could be enabled allowing for the use of Flash sigs. You think animated GIFs are annoying? ^_^;;

How ya doing, buddy?

VG, there are plenty of other reasons for not allowing flash and html than that but that's beside the point which is FUCK YOU MILES! =D

I've had animated gifs in my sig before which weren't annoying and you know it. Just because it's an animated gif and well by nature it's moving doesn't mean it's always annoying.

FELIPE NO

As I've said, I'd be fine with an increase to 75kb.

To clarify Styphon's statement of the rules, the total image dimension limit is to not stretch the tables vertically for a single-line post.

Which means if your two images exceed the table width for a 800x600 display, the second image will wrap to the next line, which will then stretch the table vertically instead.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by AcerBandit

VG, there are plenty of other reasons for not allowing flash and html than that but that's beside the point which is FUCK YOU MILES! =D

I'm quite aware of all the HTML flaws in vBulletin, plus there's idea that somebody could say "Hey my sig is only 4kb!" when it's streaming content that could be easily in the MB and undetectable other than how long it takes to load.

And the fact that you hate me.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

I don,t see why evryone wat and increase in the sig limit... look I made planty of sig here and never had any problem with the 50kb and every time my sig still are in very good quality... sure its not a lot of difference to up it to 75kb, but this will change almost nothing if you can have a very good quality in 50kb...

There's nowhere I can't reach.

75kb will more easily allow you to use PNGs as your signature rather than JPGs. PNGs allow alpha transparency, so you don't have to make a background layer that is the same color as the table background. Sometimes JPGs save wrong, so the background color is off, making it noticeable when used.

I'd rather prefer 100kb for PNG signatures with alpha transparency, but I'm not going to push this.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Ok, I'm assuimg 75KB is the new limit. *Makes large PNG sig for no reason*

And either update that sig checker or remove it entirely. It's annoying to have to use that circumvention technique.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

*go check the limit in the sig setting*

nop they haven't change >.>


oh and come on, how many more time (or sec should I said) that it take to put a blue background on your sig... all you have to do is when your sig is finish, make a new layer, take the paint bucket tool and voilà! (omg I took 5 more sec to make a sig that look exactly like a .png that take twice filesize!)

I was speaking idiomatically.

I know that. Hence the "I made it for no reason" comment.

If we're allowed to make huge as hell sigs I might as well abuse the priviledge.

Hell I could make it a GIF if I felt like it and it would look fine(ish). That's not the point though. =o

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Inhert

oh and come on, how many more time (or sec should I said) that it take to put a blue background on your sig... all you have to do is when your sig is finish, make a new layer, take the paint bucket tool and voilà! (omg I took 5 more sec to make a sig that look exactly like a .png that take twice filesize!)

Did you even read what I said.

JPGs are prone to sometimes saving wrong, making it off-color to the background.

Using alpha transparent PNGs, you save yourself the trouble. And they're also lossless.

I bet you even use Internet Explorer, huh.

FELIPE NO

I use firefox duh >.>

and I never had problem with .jpg if you put the background at the end and save it with the "save for the web" ...

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

I've managed to find two different ways of evading the "Your signature is too big. Max dimensions are 550w by 300h blah blah blurrrrrrrrgh" message.

So I'm not entirely sure of what's happening here. Since the majority of people/staff have said 75k, is 75k allowed or is it uncertain? I've seen a couple of people with signatures the size of 50~75k, so I only assume it's been changed.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Bumping so people might get to work getting rid of that sig checker. >_>

There's nowhere I can't reach.

The limit is still 50k :/

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

I was trying to change my signature recently and was having a hell of a time implementing it using the same (if not less than) dimensions of the set I am currently using. For whatever reason, I would have to take this signature to 119x100 in order to be displayed with my Last.FM signature. As you can see, with my current set total length is more than with this new configuration yet VB is saying my total dimensions are over the limit. File size is not the problem as it is well below the max. I don't know if the PHP generated sig is getting penalized or I am just overlooking something obvious? I have tried an old GW signature that uses roughly the same dimensions and it also said it was too big when used along with the scrobbler sig (keep in mind I had used this before in the same setup.) So obviously something is up, as the combined dimensions are 385x259 and about 13KB total. Now I would prefer not to make any changes, for fear of being unable to go back to the existing configuration after doing the headphone chain avatar/sig witout drastacly reducing the image size.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Colonel Skills

Bumping so people might get to work getting rid of that sig checker. >_>

Bump.

Most amazing jew boots

And the point of bumping a sticky is? =[

I don't think anyone cares anymore about the signature checker or dimensions.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

A lot of people care about the signature checker, myself included. It is highly retarded.

FELIPE NO