Bigger Avatars

[Compile 'em all]

I mean come on already, it is 2008 and we are still stuck with those microscopic 75x75 20k avatars. 125x125* would be nice. kthxbai.


*there are tons of high-traffic forums running on vBulletin that allow that.

 

[MacDawg]

I mean come on already, it is 2008 and we are still stuck with those microscopic 75x75 20k avatars. 125x125* would be nice. kthxbai.


*there are tons of high-traffic forums running on vBulletin that allow that.

And they are annoying

Emphasis should be on the post, not the 'tar
I'd be OK if they weren't allowed at all

Woof, Woof - Dawg

 

[Eidorian]

This is going to be a mess.

Keep in mind the long standing tradition that staff have 100 x 100 pixel avatars so they can be more easily identified.

At least that's what I remember from the last time we wanted larger avatars.

 

[bigandy]

OOOOH! Can we have 800x600 flash animations in our signatures too?

</stupid ideas>

 

[Compile 'em all]

This is going to be a mess.

Keep in mind the long standing tradition that staff have 100 x 100 pixel avatars so they can be more easily identified.

At least that's what I remember from the last time we wanted larger avatars.

sheesh, do you actually believe that members of this board identify mods/editors/gods from their avatar size?. I didn't even know that that was the case till now.

There are many forums already allowing bigger avatars and there is no mess. kthx.

 

[nickspohn]

Eh, it would be nice. Besides the fact of bandwidth, most people do have higher res screens now. I need something to fill in on my 1920 x 1200.

 

[bigandy]

It ain't broke.

Why fix it?

kthx

And that's meant to help the cause of taking the request seriously?

bandwidth

Because MacRumors doesn't consume enough as it is, with as many active users as it has posting all kinds of silliness?

 

[PlaceofDis]

i actually wouldn't mind seeing a slight bump to be honest. a lot of the tars do blend in now and it used to be easier to distinguish between them all.

not even by my, but it'd be nice, i'm a visual person when it comes to fining people's posts.

 

[Compile 'em all]

OOOOH! Can we have 800x600 flash animations in our signatures too?

</stupid ideas>

Did you read my post? Did you read your post? Did you read my post? Did you read your post? Did you read my post? Did you read your post? Did you read my post? Did you read your post? Did you read my post? Did you read your post?

I am asking for a marginal increase in the avatar size 25px or 50 px max, nothing earth shattering.

 

[sushi]

And they are annoying

Emphasis should be on the post, not the 'tar
I'd be OK if they weren't allowed at all

Completely agree.

OOOOH! Can we have 800x600 flash animations in our signatures too?

</stupid ideas>

Agree on the later part.

There are many forums already allowing bigger avatars and there is no mess. kthx.

Personally, I don't come here for the tars. I come here to read the posts.

The tars are just a handy reference.

Did you read my post? Did you read your post? Did you read my post? Did you read your post? Did you read my post? Did you read your post? Did you read my post? Did you read your post? Did you read my post? Did you read your post?

This kind of response is not going to have you taken seriously.

I am asking for a marginal increase in the avatar size 25px or 50 px max, nothing earth shattering.

Why is it so important to you to have a larger tar?

Just think of all the work it will create for everyone to update their tars. And for what? Frankly I don't see any benefit.

Again, I come here for the posts and not to look at tars. But that's just me.

 

[bigandy]

Did you read my post? Did you read your post? Did you read my post? Did you read your post? Did you read my post? Did you read your post? Did you read my post? Did you read your post? Did you read my post? Did you read your post?

I am asking for a marginal increase in the avatar size 25px or 50 px max, nothing earth shattering.

This kind of response is not going to have you taken seriously.

Completely in agreement with sushi there.

Why are you repeating yourself? Of course I read your post, of course I understand you are asking for an increase in avatar dimensions.

Did you understand I disagreed with it? Did you? Did you understand?

While it may not be earth shattering, it's not important either. As has already been said, it's about the posts, not about the silly little frilly bits.

Dig a little deeper and it's obvious that's what I was hinting at in my first post.

 

[Compile 'em all]

Why is it so important to you to have a larger tar?

From where is it exactly did you deduce that it is so important for me to have bigger avatars? it is just a simple suggestion that came to my mind while posting on some other forums then here. While I do agree it is nothing important I don't see why not.

 

[dmr727]

I say keep them where they are. I'm a luddite and don't always view this site with current hardware.

 

[apfhex]

While I do agree it is nothing important I don't see why not.

Then I guess you could say some of us think "why?" instead of "why not". It's not like we're restricted to 32x32 avatars. Maybe once resolution independence becomes a reality...

 

[TwinCities Dan]

From where is it exactly did you deduce that it is so important for me to have bigger avatars? it is just a simple suggestion that came to my mind while posting on some other forums then here. While I do agree it is nothing important I don't see why not.

(Just kiddin' I'm still here )

I think the avatars aren't really tied to a pixel size, I have seen tall/skinny avatars on MR, but most people just stick with a square one.

I think it is more about the physical size of the avatar (as in KB) I discovered this after trying to upload a much more interesting animated gif I made for my own avatar (I believe the current limit is 24 KB or so). So I suppose if Arn felt so compelled, he could up the limit?

 

[OllyW]

I say keep them where they are. I'm a luddite and don't always view this site with current hardware.

You can always chose not to display avatars.

 

[bigandy]

Personally, I tend to prefer this way:



Plus it's easier for me this way.

...which makes far more sense.

I would have done it that way, but today I have teh dumb.

I suppose if Arn felt so compelled, he could up the limit?

He could. But then he'd have to pay more bandwidth bills too

 

[iJohnHenry]

Yes, but then how would we determine who the freaks were.

 

[TEG]

It would be nice if just the User Name and Avatar were centered in the huge left side box. It just looks weird, considering most sites center justify the left box, or the box is no larger than the Avatars.

TEG

 

[iMacmatician]

I think the avatars aren't really tied to a pixel size, I have seen tall/skinny avatars on MR, but most people just stick with a square one.

I think it is more about the physical size of the avatar (as in KB) I discovered this after trying to upload a much more interesting animated gif I made for my own avatar (I believe the current limit is 24 KB or so). So I suppose if Arn felt so compelled, he could up the limit?

The maximum size of your custom image is 75 by 75 pixels or 19.5 KB (whichever is smaller).

I'd like a 100·100 or so limit. My fractal avatar's hard to see at 75·75.

 

[GoCubsGo]

And they are annoying

Emphasis should be on the post, not the 'tar
I'd be OK if they weren't allowed at all

Woof, Woof - Dawg

I'm going to have to agree with Dawg here. Oh and +1 for not knowing Mods had 100x100 px tars.

 

[JNB]

I'd like a 100·100 or so limit. My fractal avatar's hard to see at 75·75.

So that's what it is. It looked like an infrared image of a hemorrhoid. I think you should get a larger 'tar.

(Just kidding!!! It's a beeyootiful 'tar!)

 

[PlaceofDis]

i understand that the point isn't the 'tar. and i agree. but slightly larger avatars don't hurt really either, it makes people more identifiable and able to express themselves better. i'm not saying 125x125, but looking at the mod's tars which are at 100x100, it wouldn't be bad, and then bump theirs to 125x125 and we're set. at least in my opinion.

and the size limit wouldn't have to be increased greatly, to keep down on the obnoxious gifs and that. but the same ratio as we have now i'd say.

 

[scotty96LSC]

In the case of the avatar, bigger is not better. Besides you can do a lot with photoshop (if you have it) and 20k.

 

[sushi]

From where is it exactly did you deduce that it is so important for me to have bigger avatars? it is just a simple suggestion that came to my mind while posting on some other forums then here. While I do agree it is nothing important I don't see why not.

Just from your comments.

Sorry if I misunderstood you.

In the case of the avatar, bigger is not better. Besides you can do a lot with photoshop (if you have it) and 20k.

Agree.

I use the tars to recognize posters. The current size is okay for that.