Printable View
Hello again.
I'm wondering what would be the standard/default size for a forum signature banner. You know those things some peeps have in their signature to support or 'brag' about something. Like, the xfire profile banner or what it's called.
So what are your thoughts of a nice size for these would be?
Probably the smaller the better.
yeah, but ain't easy getting much content into small ones... I think Imma just make different ones in different sizes...
For supporting 800x600 resolution, anything wider than 600 is bound to cause problems. 640x480 is extremely rare nowadays, mainly only used during safe mode or Windows installation. Heightwise, this isn't of concern for normal web usage, but for forum signatures, something like 64 would be a nice cap. That's about 4 lines' worth for Tahoma size 10. Thus, I'm suggesting 512x64 as the maximum (a texture size for 3D games).
For avatars, I'd suggest 64x64. Some forums use 80x80 and a few go into triple-digits. Here, since this isn't an artwork forum, 64x64 seems decent. 128x64 may also be okay for the extreme upper end.
I'm NOT advertising! (Have to repeat this, 'cause peeps suspect everyone of advertising these days xP)
http://moe.aeresentertainment.com/im...00x50Small.png
What you peeps think of that? Nice and simple for forum usage?
You realize that 600 is the height dimension, right? Unless of course, you have 200 pixel wide scrollbars?Quote:
Originally Posted by ulillillia
Market share for browsers, operating systems and search engines
According to them, 800x600 is not all that popular. By their stats, you can go up to 800 px in width (accounting for borders) and cover >91%. (Of course, they also have a 0.11% of us browsing with 0px by 0px resolutions?)
The offset comes from the side. The post itself is on the right side of the screen, but you've got the left side that contains the avatar, your display name, title, posts, etc.. This takes up probably 150 or so pixels. Add in the scroll bar, table padding, and page margins and 600 is very close to the upper limit.
I got lost by ulil's post, you talking to me there? :P
On average the maximum size is 500 x 100 pixels on the sites that I frequent(ed).
Flashing animations are to be avoided.
For forum sigs, I'd suggest 0x0 -- at least on here anyway.
I'd say 1x1. Still a lot of possible banners. 16777216 to be exact ;).
Actually it would be 4,294,967,296 (hint: PNG with alpha channel).Quote:
Originally Posted by EVOEx
But what would alpha really change in the appearance of the banner? I believe that all effects using the alpha channel can be achieved without the alpha channel as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by ulillillia
Okay, I doubt a monitor can even display the 16 million colors. And even if it can, our eyes won't be able to keep them apart ;).
I like maximum limits of 128x128 (or close). Usually, they are not big enough to cause the left border to expand, and a big avatar is always nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by ulillillia
I like flashing animations...Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzzBuzz
They usually make places lively. And they make your jealous :p
Still, they can be somewhat distracting, but I have never had a problem with it...
For animation, I usually put in a change and frame rate cap. High frame rates are only allowed if there is very little change between each frame. If there's a lot of change, the frame rate has to be almost bottomed out, once every 10 seconds or something if there's a lot of change, though this depends on the size of the image itself. Then again, you wouldn't want my record-holder posted here - 3444 frames at typically 10 fps, 4.1 MB, over 8 minutes long, needs ~150 MB of memory (!), and has a 320x240 image size.... Don't believe I have something like that? Here's proof. It took only 7 days to do it, 3 to make the scenery, 2 more to make the position notes for how it'll behave, another for processing, and the last for testing. Scaling it down to 80x60 won't do much good....
Edit: 150 MB of memory - just checked it.
I don't understand this. Isn't a gif created frame by frame? What's difficult in showing "That should be about 6000ft" when you know that is what displayed at the bottom?. Also why use gif when there is flash for these sort of things?Quote:
Originally Posted by ulillillia
Many sites do not allow flash for sigs, or in posts due to the ability to run malicious code through it.Quote:
Originally Posted by stevesmithx
Flash costs a huge amount and is highly overpriced in my opinion. It's supposed to be an animated cartoon, my first one. The text at the top is speech. I just used a program to set the positions of layers based off of details in a text file, then used "The GIMP" to open up all 3634 original frames to form the final result, optimizing it to 3444 frames. I mainly just use Excel to get the positions calculated. I've heard that Flash doesn't have the option of opening a text file to set positions for the various layers which defeats any use for it. I can still use AVI though (and this animation has a few mistakes in it).Quote:
Originally Posted by stevesmithx
Perhaps we can start using Silverlight in the near future!
Well, anything that beats the speed of Flash is welcome in my opinion.
Animated GIF files are ridiculously limited.