Avatar size limit - Can off-site have a raise?

TheFacelessEvil · **Posted:** Thu May 08, 2008 5:27 pm

With the support of BTG, I'd like to bring this suggestion to the table:

I'm perfectly understanding of the KB limit when it comes to uploading an avatar onto the wiki server (because who wants a clogged server), however...

When you link off-site, is it ok to have avatars that are over that limit? Not to the extreme, of course, just maybe up to 20 or 30 KB.

What do you think, my darlings? Thanks! :mrgreen:

Hey... this is my 777th post. Jackpot?!

Jitka · **Posted:** Thu May 08, 2008 5:39 pm

I vote yes.

It's dot com · **Posted:** Thu May 08, 2008 5:45 pm

The size limit has nothing to do with our server. We have plenty of hard drive space and bandwidth. The size limit is to keep page-loading times to a minimum.

TheFacelessEvil · **Posted:** Thu May 08, 2008 5:46 pm

It's dot com wrote:

The size limit has nothing to do with our server. We have plenty of hard drive space and bandwidth. The size limit is to keep page-loading times to a minimum.

Oh. Well in that case, 20 or 30KB shouldn't kill anyone's page-loading times, right? With today's updated technology 'n all...

Capt. Ido Nos · **Posted:** Thu May 08, 2008 6:21 pm

Hay, anyone else remember that Lol motherland beast of a sig that alberto had that one time? Nearly made the internet commit suicide? Those were the days...

DS_Kid · **Posted:** Thu May 08, 2008 7:04 pm

I would say that the file size limit could be upped at least a slight bit. At most, I'd say maybe to 20 - 25 KB, as that allows the less technical people to upload avatars of the maximum 100x100 filesize without the risk of it being several KB over the current limit.

From experience, most of the higher-resolution (normally 100x100) PNG avatars that I've made are around 8 - 15 KB, with that number being slightly higher with transparency effects added in. This usually leads to me having to remove useless features saved with the file (like creation time and such, which isn't really too heartbreaking), along with having to spend time compressing the image further with things such as the Posterize tool.

I remember that in years' past, the primary excuse has been to keep loading times to a minimum for dial-up users. As time has gone on, the number of users to note that they've used dial-up has decreased to an almost nonexistent number. Besides, if we're going to post huge images (aka the Awesome smiley) regularly, then I don't see why the extra 450 KB of loading for avatars would be so bad (assuming the maximum filesize was changed to 25 KB from 10 KB, and that every 30 posts to a page had an avatar of that filesize, which would probably be doubtful).

Also, I'm not sure if you admins have changed this yet, but the filesize cap for avatars uploaded to the HR Wiki servers has been 9 KB instead of the maximum 10 KB, which leads to some minor issues with some people that I've made avatars for.

ramrod · **Posted:** Thu May 08, 2008 11:15 pm

I'm all up for a general raise for avatars, but I'm not quite sure how'd we do that...

TheFacelessEvil · **Posted:** Thu May 08, 2008 11:16 pm

ramrod wrote:

I'm all up for a general raise for avatars, but I'm not quite sure how'd we do that...

I think if it's off site, you can just do it without a problem. Like, I uploaded the avatar I wanted earlier but it was 18KB instead of 10KB.

TheFacelessEvil · **Posted:** Fri May 09, 2008 6:19 pm

So... What's the verdict? Good times, bad times?

iand93 · **Posted:** Fri May 09, 2008 10:15 pm

TheFacelessEvil wrote:

Good times, bad times?

YOU KNOW I'VE HAD MY SHARE

couldn't resist

Potates · **Posted:** Fri May 09, 2008 10:18 pm

iand93 wrote:

TheFacelessEvil wrote:

Good times, bad times?

YOU KNOW I'VE HAD MY SHARE

Tater approves of this post.

Einoo T. Spork · **Posted:** Mon May 12, 2008 2:25 am

TheFacelessEvil wrote:

So... What's the verdict? Good times, bad times?

...it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way--in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.

Coleslaw · **Posted:** Mon May 12, 2008 10:28 pm

I vote yes.

Acekirby · **Posted:** Wed May 14, 2008 1:50 am

Yes

Partially so animated avatars are possible

I still harbor anger toward Jones for saying Sparkle and COLA's animation ideas were bad because they were great

TheFacelessEvil · **Posted:** Wed May 14, 2008 3:02 am

Acekirby wrote:

Yes

Partially so animated avatars are possible

I still harbor anger toward Jones for saying Sparkle and COLA's animation ideas were bad because they were great

Well, it seems the people are giving me A-OKs, so I hope it's OK to put up my animated stave-it-off now...

What were COLA and Sparkle's animation ideas?

DS_Kid · **Posted:** Mon May 19, 2008 9:47 pm

Discussion on this just kinda died...

So has there been any modmin ramblings about this rule? It is starting to get pretty annoying to spend extra time doing a bunch of compressing methods for avatars without making the image look too terrible. Something as simple as upping the limit to 20 or 25 KB would be nice. With a limit like that, PNGs of the 100x100 filesize could definitely fit without any issues, and basic animated GIFs could also work out that aren't too much of an eyesore (which I recall one admin talking about awhile ago).

TheFacelessEvil · **Posted:** Mon May 19, 2008 9:50 pm

This particular discussion was for Avatars that are used by linking them off-site, such as my stave-it-off avatar I'm using currently.

But yeah, it would be nice to get offical-offical word from admin-styles saying this is fine. *press fingers together dramatically* Until then, the mods seem to think it's fine.

Capt. Ido Nos · **Posted:** Tue May 20, 2008 3:22 am

Disk wrote:

So has there been any modmin ramblings about this rule?

Crap, I knew we forgot to do something.

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest · **Posted:** Tue May 20, 2008 4:41 am

Acekirby wrote:

I still harbor anger toward Jones for saying Sparkle and COLA's animation ideas were bad because they were great

Wait, which animation idea? The one about teh asteroid/missile hitting the earth and then it says "COLA"?

Acekirby · **Posted:** Tue May 20, 2008 4:46 am

This always filled me with rage for some unknown reason:

InterruptorJones wrote:

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest wrote:

Mr. Sparkle wrote:

I don't think I could provide better reasons for not increasing the size limit if I tried. You guys are great.

Lunar Jesty · **Posted:** Tue May 20, 2008 10:28 am

Yeah I sort of agree with Jones there

Rusty · **Posted:** Tue May 20, 2008 1:56 pm

Lunar Jesty wrote:

Yeah I sort of agree with Jones there

>: (

TheFacelessEvil · **Posted:** Tue May 20, 2008 3:42 pm

Acekirby wrote:

This always filled me with rage for some unknown reason:

InterruptorJones wrote:

I don't think I could provide better reasons for not increasing the size limit if I tried. You guys are great.

Well, he's not here anymore, so who cares what he thinks.

StrongRad · **Posted:** Tue May 20, 2008 7:17 pm

Lunar Jesty wrote:

Yeah I sort of agree with Jones there

So do I.

Those weren't good reasons for a limit raise.

TFE's pleads the case a lot better.

TheFacelessEvil · **Posted:** Tue May 20, 2008 8:08 pm

StrongRad wrote:

Lunar Jesty wrote:

Yeah I sort of agree with Jones there

So do I.

Those weren't good reasons for a limit raise.

TFE's pleads the case a lot better.

:)
After all, who can resist a 70's mustache and a guitar?

Acekirby · **Posted:** Wed May 21, 2008 12:57 am

How is that not a good avatar

StrongRad · **Posted:** Wed May 21, 2008 1:00 am

Acekirby wrote:

How is that not a good avatar

How is it a good one?

OK, so, unless ramrod objects (and I don't care if he does, since I was on and he wasn't), maximum off-site avatars are now 100x100 pixels (same physical size) and 20kb (doubled the filesize).
Banners are still subject to the same limits.

It may be a couple days before hosted ones catch up (I'm-a talk to one of the technical admin people, like Tom, Stu, or Dot com to make sure that the increase on hosted avatars won't drain our bandwidth.
If it's really an issue for you, though, just get a photobucket account. They're free, you know.

Acekirby · **Posted:** Wed May 21, 2008 1:02 am

StrongRad wrote:

Acekirby wrote:

How is that not a good avatar

How is it a good one?

Look at it. It's funny. Also superior to avatars that don't move. "How is it a good one" is not a valid rebuttal.

Not trying to turn this into anything but seriously that's not like a horrible avatar.

Einoo T. Spork · **Posted:** Wed May 21, 2008 4:31 am

Acekirby wrote:

Look at it. It's funny. Also superior to avatars that don't move. "How is it a good one" is not a valid rebuttal.

Not trying to turn this into anything but seriously that's not like a horrible avatar.

I agree with this.

The Sanjaya one, however, is something that would make me tear my eyes out if I had to see it every time someone posted.

ed 'lim' smilde · **Posted:** Wed May 21, 2008 3:03 pm

Both of those are over 200 kb... I don't think the limit's going nearly that high anyways.

Also, is that avatar Ace posted from a movie or something? If so, I haven't seen it, and have no clue what's going on, which is probably why I don't get it... Maybe we need to allow SWF avatars with sound and everything...

Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Avatar size limit - Can off-site have a raise?

Who is online