Welcome to Eyes on FF!


Final Fantasy



Ring Tones



Over eight to choose from! Unlimited access. You don't pay per ringtone



Ringophone.com
>>> Click here to download Final Fantasy Ringtones
Oh no!
 

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
rubah
Site Staff
Cid's Knight
Dusk and Starshine
rubah's Avatar
Location: Don't forget you're not alone
#1
:monster: Avatars

I think we should have 100x100 avatars. We seem to be practically the only place on the intarweb that has such small avatars (besides devart). It has never looked bad when big avatars have been given out, and it's not like the forum styles are hurting for space. Besides, we might as well make the post bit longer because people's sigs take up so much space compared to the postbit (that's the stuff with your name, av, custom title, actual title, and location and post time)

We wouldn't even have to up the file size. 19 kb is plenty.

Some people complain that it wouldn't look even and pretty, well it's not even and pretty now! A lot of people use sprites for avs and those aren't 60x60. And sprites are about the only thing that looks good that small anyways.
Old 04-15-2008, 06:08 AM
rubah is offline  
Ouch!
Refresh!
Ouch!'s Avatar
Location: The U
Default

This is a valid concern, and one that has been bothering me for quite some time. Since I'm not the most photoshop savvy individual ever. Sometimes when I have to shrink my avatars to the 60x60, they lose quality. This is definitely something worth considering.
Old 04-15-2008, 06:31 AM
Ouch! is online now  
Takara
Queen of the BushHags
Takara's Avatar
Location: BushHagville
Default

Now, I'm most likely not the most computer savvy person out there, so I'd have to look with a staff member that knows this more than me before giving a definite "yes" or "no". The avatar limitation may not be entirely EoFF's staff decision, but it could be a limitation that is coded in this version of vBulletin.

I do agree bigger avatars would be better, aesthetically speaking. I'll try to investigate the matter a bit to see if it would actually be doable.
Old 04-15-2008, 01:20 PM
Takara is offline  
Flying Mullet
Site Staff
Cid's Knight
*this space for rent*
Flying Mullet's Avatar
Location: Finding my monkey cage exit strategy
Default

Call me old-fashioned, but I like the smaller avatars. Avatars are an accessory to your posts and not the main focus. If we have larger avatars everyone will have to make longer posts to compensate for this ratio and that's just too much reading for everyone to do.
Old 04-15-2008, 02:12 PM
Flying Mullet is offline  
qwertyxsora
緑は行く!
qwertyxsora's Avatar
Location: Home
Default

The smaller avatars make this forum special, and the big avatars are reserved for staff pranks. Thank you for you feedback though.
Old 04-15-2008, 03:13 PM
qwertyxsora is online now  
Bahamut2000X
Whut?
Bahamut2000X's Avatar
Location: Where I am of course.
Default

Small avatars aren't that bad, you just need to know how to size properly. Larger avatars are just too bulky and messy looking. It's not the size that matters it's how you use it.
Old 04-15-2008, 04:27 PM
Bahamut2000X is offline  
Heath
Site Staff
Kuja Trance
Heath's Avatar
Location: United Kingdom
Default

I think even with 100x100 avatars people would eventually want larger ones. I personally think 100x100 is a bit bulky for the forums anyway regardless of the size of the postbit. Fine for LJ but not so much for forum browsing. It's worth considering but I don't see much of a problem with the current size of the avatars at the moment in all honesty but I'm not opposed to it.
Old 04-15-2008, 04:44 PM
Heath is offline  
rubah
Site Staff
Cid's Knight
Dusk and Starshine
rubah's Avatar
Location: Don't forget you're not alone
Default

Takara, it's perfectly possible to change the limits. A certain admin did for a joke not too long ago >:{

Mullet, if avatars are accessories, then signatures are moreso. We should make them 550x60 so they aren't taking up more vertical height than the posts of most users.

100x100 isn't that bulky. It's about 20 pixels narrower than your custom title, heath, and about 30 narrower than your location field.

Yes small avatars are bad, and no it's not just how to size them. When everyone used 800x600 resolutions, avatars were .75% of the screen area. With my resolution (smaller than several eoffers), a 60x60 avatar is .27% of the screen area. Changing them to 100x100 would put them at .77% of the screen size on a 1440x900 screen, which will only stand to go down over time.

In fact, I'm pretty sure that when eoff was created I was still using 640x400, making 60x60 avatars 1.4% of the screen area. (Not that I visisted eoff then, but if I had and if we'd had 60x60 avatars!)

I hope you all come to your senses.
Old 04-15-2008, 05:21 PM
rubah is offline  
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2007, Eyes on Final Fantasy.
Sean Robinson Design