Avatar 100x100 ?

[Premium]

Please and thank-you! :tu:

I got this sweet new avatar that I want to show off

-Jarrod

 

[Chris]

That would be double the size as it is currently at 50 x 50. That's a mighty large avatar and each one that is displayed would be double the bandwidth as well that it uses. It would be a bigger hog on the server too having such large avatars. The focus of the community is the content, not who has the biggest or best avatar. :imho:

You could try shrinking it down to a size that fits or show off the new avatar with an attachment in a thread. :gl:

All the Best,
Chris

 

[Sabre]

Agreed, 100x100 is too big, you should be able to shrink it, while keeping the quality, in most cases :tu:

 

[Gene]

That would be double the size as it is currently at 50 x 50. That's a mighty large avatar and each one that is displayed would be double the bandwidth as well that it uses. It would be a bigger hog on the server. :imho:

You could try shrinking it down to a size that fits or show off the new avatar with an attachment in a thread. :gl:

All the Best,
Chris

I wonder if a larger avatar is possible if it is self-hosted. There is already a place to enter a URL rather than uploading it to NamePros...

 

[Sabre]

Even then, the user still has to load the image, and it would be hell for people on dial-up

 

[Gene]

Even then, the user still has to load the image, and it would be hell for people on dial-up

But the other side of the coin is that we might encourage people still on dialup to switch to high-speed. (Just joking :D )

 

[True_Snake]

But the other side of the coin is that we might encourage people still on dialup to switch to high-speed. (Just joking )

:bingo:

It'd be a pain for NP, IMHO :gl: .


True_Snake

 

[Sabre]

:lol:

It COULD work, but thered have to be an option to turn avatars on and off....

:]

 

[Scott]

:lol:

It COULD work, but thered have to be an option to turn avatars on and off....

:]

There is.

 

[Sabre]

..... and it would have to be set to off for guests and members until they turn it on themselves...

 

[Chris]

But the other side of the coin is that we might encourage people still on dialup to switch to high-speed. (Just joking :D )

That could make a nice affiliation for RJ with the large high-speed providers. The individuals with slow dialup would get sick of waiting for the large avatars to load so they'd give in and make the switch.

 

[Gene]

Hmm, what about keeping the avatar at 50x50, but make it a mouseover to a larger image (hosted off-site)...

 

[-db-]

Two points.

1) The avatar size used to be 70 x 70, and many of us have that size now. It must have switched to 50 x 50, which tells me their is already an effort to speed things up and reduce bandwidth, which supports the feelings expressed here (which I agree with) that 100 x 100 would not be acceptable.

2) As it stands, Sabre and Gene already appear to be staring at me, and their eyes follow me around the forum at the current size. If their faces got any bigger it would really creep me out. :o

 

[Gene]

As it stands, Sabre and Gene already appear to be staring at me, and their eyes follow me around the forum at the current size. If their faces got any bigger it would really creep me out. :o

What ever do you mean? Bwahaha

 

[-db-]

OK, that's it.... I'm outta here.

:lol:

 

[hanz]

well, I would love 100x100 as most of the avatars are at that size

 

[Rob]

The smaller the avatar the better. Smaller forums are fine with big avatars, sometimes up to 130x130, but NP is too big for this. A 56k user will not enjoy waiting for 20 avatars to load each page.

 

[jeter4982]

The smaller the avatar the better. Smaller forums are fine with big avatars, sometimes up to 130x130, but NP is too big for this. A 56k user will not enjoy waiting for 20 avatars to load each page.

Ya, that is true Rob. It's not just one per page, but in most cases its going to be 15-20 per thread, which will drive people away from NamePros, not to mention eat up a ton of bandwith.

Tom

 

[Jimmy Changa]

And here I was going to suggest 128(width) x 64(height) like my other forums so I could use those avatars. :lol:

 

[Premium]

Thanks for all the info, I agree that it would be a hassle to Namepros. Who cares I don't pay the bills.. :blink: :lol:

Anyways Scott made a great point to resize it and thats exactly what I am going to do. Of course I don't care about the best avatar, just thought it was pretty cool.

 

[monaco]

I'm on broadband connection, I leave avatars, sigs, and images turned off, and use threaded mode. It started as a personal preference, but I've noticed it makes the forum pages load longer when the site has a lot of ppl logged on.

 

[matrics]

That would be double the size as it is currently at 50 x 50. That's a mighty large avatar and each one that is displayed would be double the bandwidth as well that it uses. It would be a bigger hog on the server too having such large avatars. The focus of the community is the content, not who has the biggest or best avatar. :imho:

Actually, 100x100 is 4 times bigger than 50x50 - but that just comes to underline the fact that it would put a pointless (or almost) strain on the server
I thought that this was a serious forum, not one of those half-bred gaming or hip-hop (no offence) boardlets with loads of bling-bling needing to be loaded with every post.

 

[ammo]

But the other side of the coin is that we might encourage people still on dialup to switch to high-speed. (Just joking :D )

Enter Namepros BroadBand :D

If you choose to Use this idea, You Are Agreeing To Pay All Profit To Me. :D