Vintage Mustang Forums banner

61 - 80 of 120 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,600 Posts
Party Pooper.

Does the software have an option other than 500 x 100? I enjoy seeing peoples cars and even with my magnifiers the postage stamps don't provide much detail.

So I'm losing out on some of the experience...
I like your pic, its a little on the large side though. :pirate:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,008 Posts
Discussion Starter #62
For those that have been here a long time you will remember back in the 05/06 time frame we started having issues with huge sig pictures and we put rules in place to limit the size of pictures used for signatures. Nothing underhanded going on here.
Yes - but in 05/06 you didn't set the limit at 100x500 px. No one said (that I am aware of) that there was anything underhanded. Just that it sucks.
 

·
Incorporated Sell Out
Joined
·
17,130 Posts
Yes - but in 05/06 you didn't set the limit at 100x500 px. No one said (that I am aware of) that there was anything underhanded. Just that it sucks.
I like the new sig.

05/06 was a long time ago. Suffice to say I know that I have been using the image below with the 3 cars for at least 3 years and the one before it was 500 pixels as well and both of them were sized according to the guidelines in the sig management section so that I could upload them. There are numerous threads going on the sig pics at this point....I added the clarification here to answer all of them ;)
 

·
Incorporated Sell Out
Joined
·
17,130 Posts
Just a little cutting out some background :shrug:

Sure its not as big as it used to be.......

 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,385 Posts
Hmm, guess my fun restoration flow chart is gone then! Too bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,008 Posts
Discussion Starter #66
Just a little cutting out some background :shrug:

Sure its not as big as it used to be.......


LOL - I KNOW what MY car looks like! But thanks - it's better than before.

I'm kinda partially busting stones and partially serious. It's really rather silly to limit the sig pics to 100x500. I remember all too well the ginormous pics and it was annoying to read through a post, even on the computer. But it seems as though we are now at the other end of the spectrum.
 

·
Incorporated Sell Out
Joined
·
17,130 Posts
I've gotten some nasty emails from members on this issue....and I can't really be clearer than I have been.

Sig pic sizing was broken, it is now not. People want/like large images I understand that. If someone wants to put together a recommendation on what the ideal image size is...then I(we) can work with admin to update.

A simple Google search however:
https://www.google.com/search?q=discussion+forum+optimum+image+size+for+signatures&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=discussion+forum+image+size+for+signatures&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

Nets out a full page of results of discussion forums that use a size VERY similar to what we have in the system. So what is the size we would like to see? it is 100x500 now.....should it be 150x500? 175x550? 1,000,000x100,000,000?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,385 Posts
Well, now mine is highly condensed. Oh well, I liked it while it lasted!

I think it would be reasonable to have one standard sized picture allowed per signature. 500x100 pixels is a kind of odd size. 800x600 would be awesome (what I size all my non-detailed pictures to), but 640x480 would probably be better on bandwidth and be a good compromise between clarity and page loading.

500x100 isn't that great for my picture because it limits my max width to 237 pixels. If I crop it any lower so I can make it 'larger' it'll just be a shot of womanparts and a car, which would admittedly be not that bad for the people looking but kind of defeating the purpose of the picture for me. :p I am most identifiable by my face (I hope)!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,600 Posts
Well, now mine is highly condensed. Oh well, I liked it while it lasted!

I think it would be reasonable to have one standard sized picture allowed per signature. 500x100 pixels is a kind of odd size. 800x600 would be awesome (what I size all my non-detailed pictures to), but 640x480 would probably be better on bandwidth and be a good compromise between clarity and page loading.

500x100 isn't that great for my picture because it limits my max width to 237 pixels. If I crop it any lower so I can make it 'larger' it'll just be a shot of womanparts and a car, which would admittedly be not that bad for the people looking but kind of defeating the purpose of the picture for me. :p I am most identifiable by my face (I hope)!
to some a shot of womanparts with a car in the background is not at all a bad thing, but yes your face in it makes it that much better. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,364 Posts
Well it's like the govt u just got to take it without the grease no matter how much u don't like it lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,600 Posts
Well it's like the govt u just got to take it without the grease no matter how much u don't like it lol.
there are ways around it, you can grease up before you copy paste.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
291 Posts
I've gotten some nasty emails from members on this issue....and I can't really be clearer than I have been.

Sig pic sizing was broken, it is now not. People want/like large images I understand that. If someone wants to put together a recommendation on what the ideal image size is...then I(we) can work with admin to update.

A simple Google search however:
https://www.google.com/search?q=discussion+forum+optimum+image+size+for+signatures&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=discussion+forum+image+size+for+signatures&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

Nets out a full page of results of discussion forums that use a size VERY similar to what we have in the system. So what is the size we would like to see? it is 100x500 now.....should it be 150x500? 175x550? 1,000,000x100,000,000?
I did it for fun but if you look at my sig, that's the max size that's allowed to show, 100 tall x 500 wide. I think that image area is very odd for most people. Why not something that keeps a better aspect ratio? What about something like displaying 320px wide by 240px tall? The height restriction makes for an odd size and I'd err that most people don't know how or want to work with an image editor to adjust their sizes to fit exact specs.

Here's a pic I did at 320px wide, height is 240px.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
433 Posts
I've gotten some nasty emails from members on this issue....and I can't really be clearer than I have been.

Sig pic sizing was broken, it is now not. People want/like large images I understand that. If someone wants to put together a recommendation on what the ideal image size is...then I(we) can work with admin to update.

A simple Google search however:
https://www.google.com/search?q=discussion+forum+optimum+image+size+for+signatures&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=discussion+forum+image+size+for+signatures&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

Nets out a full page of results of discussion forums that use a size VERY similar to what we have in the system. So what is the size we would like to see? it is 100x500 now.....should it be 150x500? 175x550? 1,000,000x100,000,000?

I think 775x450 is a good size.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
291 Posts
So this size for every sig? That might be going against everything that's gone on the past day. This 775x450 file is 101kb. If everyone has one at that size x 15 posts per full page plus the ads too, plus add in all the work the forum software as to make for database calls to retrieve all the info for each page, the server(s) may end up getting heavily taxed or the admins may do something kinda drastic, who knows. The one thing we do not know is how much strain the servers take and that can only be answered by the admins. The 320x240 file is 25kb. Bigger than the alloted 9kb but still close.

775px x 450px


320px x 240px



I'm in no way saying I'm right (I usually never am), but things for people to consider.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
433 Posts
So this size for every sig? That might be going against everything that's gone on the past day. This file is 101kb. If everyone has one at that size x 15 posts per full page plus the ads too, plus add in all the work the forum software as to make for database calls to retrieve all the info for each page, it will end up getting killed or the admins may just shut the site down. My 320x240 file is 25. Bigger than the alloted 9k but still close.

775px x 450px


320px x 240px



I'm in no way saying I'm right (I usually never am), but things for people to consider.
IMHO, I don't think that is too big. But, for some, they may not like it. IIRC, Schmidity (I think it was him) had one that was like 2000px wide, and that was a bit to big, but still didn't even bother me that much.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
13,003 Posts
Oh no, our sig pics are not as big as they used to! The sky is falling! I love it when I hear that some are totally pushed out of shape. Really? With all of the things going on with Mustangs and our world, is having a large sig pic really that important? (I heard that one person is going to stay away from VMF because of that. . .bye! LOL)
Stan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,364 Posts
Oh no, our sig pics are not as big as they used to! The sky is falling! I love it when I hear that some are totally pushed out of shape. Really? With all of the things going on with Mustangs and our world, is having a large sig pic really that important? (I heard that one person is going to stay away from VMF because of that. . .bye! LOL)
Stan
I know the world is not going to end off the big pic of small pic but come on. Ur a Moderator shouldn't u have a better attitude then that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,364 Posts
O ok lol oops
 
61 - 80 of 120 Posts
Top