|
Oscar (Apr 10, 2008 @ 11:52 am)
YAY! ;)
|
|
|
TofuTheGreat (Apr 10, 2008 @ 3:24 pm)
YEEEEEEEHHHHHAAAAAAAAWWWWWW!
Seriously awesome news.
|
|
|
annajon (Apr 10, 2008 @ 3:26 pm)
woopy,
|
|
|
|
TofuTheGreat (Apr 10, 2008 @ 3:27 pm)
Now can we get 100x100 pixel? ;)
|
|
|
Salvezza (Apr 10, 2008 @ 3:35 pm)
YAY! WHOOOOOPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOOOOO!
|
|
|
|
TofuTheGreat (Apr 10, 2008 @ 4:23 pm)
Or even 140x140 pixels?
|
|
|
|
Oscar (Apr 11, 2008 @ 1:39 am)
100x100 would be nice :D
|
|
|
Procyon (Apr 11, 2008 @ 5:33 am)
I set it to 90x90 for now. Don't want avatars to be too big. We'll see how that'll go.
|
|
|
|
Oscar (Apr 11, 2008 @ 5:48 am)
awesome thanks proc
|
|
|
L@rue (Apr 11, 2008 @ 7:27 am)
Thanks Procyon, It will be more easy to build a reasonable gif :)
|
|
|
Heinlein (Apr 11, 2008 @ 8:14 am)
Thanks Proc :)
|
|
|
cafn8d (Apr 11, 2008 @ 9:05 am)
90x90 pixels? 50kb?! Where's the challenge in THAT? ;) (<- j/k sarcastic winky, lol) Very generous upgrade, Procyon! :D
|
|
|
|
Procyon (Apr 11, 2008 @ 9:46 am)
We'll see how it goes. I don't want to turn PSC in a website full of animaitons. (Like this page now). I guess I can always press esc to stop the animations, but I don't want it to be too annoying. We'll see how it goes.
|
|
|
|
TofuTheGreat (Apr 11, 2008 @ 9:54 am)
90x90 is better than nuffin. ;)
|
|
|
ScionShade (Apr 11, 2008 @ 12:41 pm)
Animations was only one reason why size was restricted. Reason number 286 was that of only 50 comments and votes equals 2.5 MEGABYTES
|
|
|
|
ScionShade (Apr 11, 2008 @ 12:42 pm)
per page in avys while the image posted on that page for the contest we're all here for is limited to 125kb for half the images in each contest. Reason number 387 was
|
|
|
|
ScionShade (Apr 11, 2008 @ 12:43 pm)
to do with limitations in all areas of the site with a purpose of (A...not making pages super long by avys necessitating over 70 pixels of vertical space thereby puching the next vote/ co0mment down the page no more than was reasonable) and (B. again
|
|
|
|
ScionShade (Apr 11, 2008 @ 12:44 pm)
other limitations are in place to support a better look to the place plus conserve on storage space, such as the 255 character textual limitation which is currently forcing me to write out several seperate responses which could have been handled in opnly
|
|
|
|
ScionShade (Apr 11, 2008 @ 12:46 pm)
one response which also brings about more vertical waste due to avy sizer , spacing in code, and multiple posts. As you can see. Things were well thought out in advance, with the then traditional way of doing things which involved getting user response
|
|
|
|
ScionShade (Apr 11, 2008 @ 12:46 pm)
to perspective changes rather than implement them and seeing what sticks.
|
|
|
|
ScionShade (Apr 11, 2008 @ 12:49 pm)
This also brings to mind the textual limitations on signatures in forums. U user is not given more than a couple sentences in text to express themself, but are totally welcomed to have a large, flashing, distracting, siggy image with unlimited size.
|
|
|
|
ScionShade (Apr 11, 2008 @ 12:51 pm)
Oh , I'm sorry..I should have probably mentioned that there was indeed a number one reason with an attitude. That was simply to limit just how far this place can go in thge direction of looking..well, .......................what can I say?
|
|
|
marcoballistic (Apr 11, 2008 @ 7:22 pm)
you can say, look at my avatar go, woooooooooooooo hoooo
|
|
|
|
marcoballistic (Apr 11, 2008 @ 7:23 pm)
and only 17 kb too, so I am not breaking the bank Joe ;o)
|
|
|
|
Oscar (Apr 11, 2008 @ 8:00 pm)
damn scion any more of those hearts and this will become a love fest. We should keep the 70x70 and the new 50kb limit. Big avatars are annoying.
|
|
|
|
Procyon (Apr 11, 2008 @ 9:28 pm)
Yup that's what I was afraid of. Back to 70x70
|
|
|
|
ScionShade (Apr 12, 2008 @ 12:32 am)
HAHAHAH! I can't resist yanking yer chains. You guys are AOK
|
|
|
Granulated (Apr 20, 2008 @ 5:06 pm)
I actually tried to uplaod a 90x90 image at 35k and I got the "only allowed 70x70 .. and it said max size was 15 !! WHat the hells going on !
|
|
|
|
Granulated (Apr 20, 2008 @ 7:00 pm)
If it got put back to 70x70 how come a few people are still displaying larger ones ?
|
|
|
|
Granulated (Apr 21, 2008 @ 12:20 pm)
It's still telling me maximum of 25K !!
|
|
|
Micose (May 19, 2008 @ 7:12 am)
instead of this useless featre, what abut adding 50 k to the resized pic (again)
|
|
|
|
Procyon (Aug 28, 2009 @ 7:36 pm)
If it got put back to 70x70 how come a few people are still displaying larger ones? That is because they haven't changed theirs since it was allowed. Once they update, they won't be able to go back to the larger size though.
Max dimensions are 70x70.
|
|
|
|
ScionShade (Aug 29, 2009 @ 2:45 am)
Actually, if you were able to allow the larger size for forums, and auto-resize them for entry comments...that'd probably make a few people pretty happy. The developer guys may or may not be able to do that pretty stinking easily.
|
|