Org Mobile Site
Thread: Url Avatar size
Hello,
This topic serves to decide about the byte limit of Url Avatars, please feel free to comment about the size in bytes.
Anything else is off-topic and should be discussed in another topic.
I'll add a poll to this after we had a chat.
The previous system allowed 10 kb for Url Avatars and also 10 kb for signature pictures. We should keep it dedicated to avoid confusion. Is 10 kb for the Url Avatar good, too less or too much?
This topic serves to decide about the byte limit of Url Avatars, please feel free to comment about the size in bytes.
Anything else is off-topic and should be discussed in another topic.
I'll add a poll to this after we had a chat.
The previous system allowed 10 kb for Url Avatars and also 10 kb for signature pictures. We should keep it dedicated to avoid confusion. Is 10 kb for the Url Avatar good, too less or too much?
-
10 K is fair.
-
10 K is fair.
-
Why not keep the size the same as it is now? I like how they are all about TW I just want to see them being customized more.
usualy in othere forums they restrict avitars to Like
65 by 65 pixels or 19.5 KB (which ever happens 1st)
Heres 1 i made for forums as most people accept it.
Its 2849 bytes, so 10k is more than enough i think
65 by 65 pixels or 19.5 KB (which ever happens 1st)
Heres 1 i made for forums as most people accept it.
Its 2849 bytes, so 10k is more than enough i thinkOriginally Posted by Byzantine Prince:
Why not keep the size the same as it is now? I like how they are all about TW I just want to see them being customized more.
I agree. It's great to see personalised avatars, but it's even greater if they all can remain in the same TW 'spirit' as before. I refer to Barocca's, Myrddraal's, ichi's and Uesugi Kenshin's new avatars as very good examples of how it should be.Why not keep the size the same as it is now? I like how they are all about TW I just want to see them being customized more.
how about this, we find someone willing to make avatars into the Totalwar style, send em a pick we want, and using posts/warnings/whatevers we buy them 
I claim a rommel avatar
I claim a rommel avatar
Or make your own. How hard is it? Just take the fram and place it on top of the Rommel pic. Then cut the sides and there you go. Lazy Kaiser.
I agree, as I said in the other thread, its part of the unique feel to these forums that the avatars are all in the style of TW.
Lol, look at Myddraal's new avatar...
And I agree that the current policy is already good. Just make a few more... or, maybe, lower the post number restrictions.
And I agree that the current policy is already good. Just make a few more... or, maybe, lower the post number restrictions.
-
Whatever the final decision, my Saladin shall stay with me.
-
Whatever the final decision, my Saladin shall stay with me.
-
Wow, five posts and it was already off-topic. 
IMO 10k's fine and if you have the size restriction it'll allow for some very polished avatars. My opinion on 10k and no size limit is off-topic. 
IMO 10k's fine and if you have the size restriction it'll allow for some very polished avatars. My opinion on 10k and no size limit is off-topic. 
best I could do
And what about this one? (just trying)
Originally Posted by Epistolary Richard:
Wow, five posts and it was already off-topic.
Already before that actually, but doesn't matter too much.Wow, five posts and it was already off-topic.
-System avatars. There are over 3,000 and they're all about STW, MTW and RTW. The rare custom system avatars are small modifications or ones that come close in style.
-Url avatars. Initial idea was to drop the size, style and color requirements there. A 50*50 picture of a full plate knight would be good, but a 180*150 picture of some flowers or a tank would do as well. Photo, painted, doesn't matter. Am I right when I say we rather have it more uniformed?
It'll be possible to look at org wearing a uniform or individual casual cloths (just toggle the right boxes in your userCP). The uniform style is not going to change now, but what the Url avatar is going to be, is pretty much up to the people who're going to use it. How casual are your cloths going to be?
To raise some possibilities: the Url Avatar could remain restricted to one standard pixelsize for all (60*80 for example). And we could require that they're all square, include a frame, are painted and restricted to (a set of) theme(s). It's possible to host the images on one of the servers and have a few people managing it (users upload the pictures they want and the managers activate them for use when ok).
What is it going to be?
I'd go for a standard pixel size, preferably in line with the existing portraits so the two blend in together. I mean, if they'll all look like Uesugi Kenshin's then there'd be no problem 
(I must admit that one's beginning to sell me on the idea of custom avatars) but practically I don't think that'll be the case.
Obviously, I'd like a painted/frame criteria as well, but I think that'd cause too much grief for the people overseeing it. Posters are used to size/kb limits - other restrictions are going to rankle.
Generally, it would be sad to see the existing trove of portraits fall into abeyance. For one, they're great. Two, as new users go straight to custom avatars it'll mean more and more system avatars will be left as the generic Briton, which will lessen the appeal for those who choose to disable to url avatars.
I think it's probably best if both avatars were allowed, but give the system avatars as much prominence in the registration/UCP as currently and leave custom avatars as something for which posters have to delve a little deeper (maybe preclude junior members). The ones that want them will have them, but hopefully the they'll think more about what's in-keeping with the org's style rather than just uploading their usual comedy jpg.
(I must admit that one's beginning to sell me on the idea of custom avatars) but practically I don't think that'll be the case.Obviously, I'd like a painted/frame criteria as well, but I think that'd cause too much grief for the people overseeing it. Posters are used to size/kb limits - other restrictions are going to rankle.
Generally, it would be sad to see the existing trove of portraits fall into abeyance. For one, they're great. Two, as new users go straight to custom avatars it'll mean more and more system avatars will be left as the generic Briton, which will lessen the appeal for those who choose to disable to url avatars.
I think it's probably best if both avatars were allowed, but give the system avatars as much prominence in the registration/UCP as currently and leave custom avatars as something for which posters have to delve a little deeper (maybe preclude junior members). The ones that want them will have them, but hopefully the they'll think more about what's in-keeping with the org's style rather than just uploading their usual comedy jpg.
Hmm, if we're going with the TW thing, I'd like to know if I'd be able to use an avatar depicting something from the times of Napoleon? It even looks like RTW, since the character depicted is a member of one of Napoleon's Guard regiments and is wearing a Phrygian-style helmet. And besides, there is NTW to consider...
Seriously now, I'd personally prefer 15k... it gives me a little more leeway to make the avatar presentable. However, 10k is acceptable, for 56k users etc of course...
~Wiz
Seriously now, I'd personally prefer 15k... it gives me a little more leeway to make the avatar presentable. However, 10k is acceptable, for 56k users etc of course...
~Wiz
I think 10k is pretty good, my 56k will be able to take it.
I think having restrictions on the theme of custom avatars would help keep the org's atmosphere, but I also think it would be nearly impossible to enforce. The only way I can think of making it workable would be to have people have to go through a moderator and have a set of guidlines given to each mod as to what fits. This may have to be done anyway so it could work very well, as long as the mods can handle the extra work.
Thanks Epistolary Richard, I figured it would go better with my screenname than my sohei pic, besides it is in color and the other is B&W pencil. I am proud to be a guinea pig.
I think having restrictions on the theme of custom avatars would help keep the org's atmosphere, but I also think it would be nearly impossible to enforce. The only way I can think of making it workable would be to have people have to go through a moderator and have a set of guidlines given to each mod as to what fits. This may have to be done anyway so it could work very well, as long as the mods can handle the extra work.
Thanks Epistolary Richard, I figured it would go better with my screenname than my sohei pic, besides it is in color and the other is B&W pencil. I am proud to be a guinea pig.
10KB is fair and should allow for some interesting avatars. I think it would be nice if avatars represented figures with at least some relation to the theme of the board. Not necessarily a strict one, so things like Rommel or Napoleonic era figures would be fine, but perhaps not a bunch of flowers! For a number of reasons I think it would be best to restrict the url avatars to those uploaded to the Org servers. If that were the case, I'd have no problem with newer members having them.
Originally Posted by Tricky Lady:
I agree. It's great to see personalised avatars, but it's even greater if they all can remain in the same TW 'spirit' as before. I refer to Barocca's, Myrddraal's, ichi's and Uesugi Kenshin's new avatars as very good examples of how it should be.
At first, I was thinking uniformity is antipathetic to custom, but I do like that TW 'theme'. Not necessarily limited to STW, MTW or RTW, but extended to other theaters as well (i.e. Kaiser's 'Rommel' etc.). So I second TL and others on this.I agree. It's great to see personalised avatars, but it's even greater if they all can remain in the same TW 'spirit' as before. I refer to Barocca's, Myrddraal's, ichi's and Uesugi Kenshin's new avatars as very good examples of how it should be.
Ten kb is enough I think, but I would disagree with the uniform pixel size. I think a fixed dimension is too limiting. Perhaps, lay down a maximum ceiling (i.e not to exceed 150x150, 100x100, 80x80 or whatever is decided) but the specific dimension I think should be up to the user. Other than that, I'm with the others.
50x70 Is a good sized avitar and this should stay the limit.
(prehaps both Minimum and maximum)
This would also keep the forum some what symetrical,
Also Larrger Avits could caus unforseen lag for 56k users as they Not only suffer from kb's but also amount of pixels
Also the TW Theme of the avitars Although keeping within the feeling of the web page, Will inevitably restrict the Design options Available to avit makers,
But, The tw theme is Good
So in conclusion Id say,
maximum and minimum avitar size to be 50 x 70
(to keep the web page symmetrical)
10kb Is More than enough,
and Some leway in design options of avitars,
(i.e Must have a frame "as posted above")
Just some input
ShambleS
(prehaps both Minimum and maximum)
This would also keep the forum some what symetrical,
Also Larrger Avits could caus unforseen lag for 56k users as they Not only suffer from kb's but also amount of pixels
Also the TW Theme of the avitars Although keeping within the feeling of the web page, Will inevitably restrict the Design options Available to avit makers,
But, The tw theme is Good
So in conclusion Id say,
maximum and minimum avitar size to be 50 x 70
(to keep the web page symmetrical)
10kb Is More than enough,
and Some leway in design options of avitars,
(i.e Must have a frame "as posted above")
Just some input
ShambleS
Question for the people who want a 'theme' for the custom avatars: are we talking about portrait like avatars (militairy and historical) and/or ones of such people with some background? So, an avatar of a tank is not ok, but Rommel standing in front of a tank is?
Just my 2 cents as a regular member:
since url avatars are toggle-able via the userCP (and not 'on' by default) I see no particular reason to restrict the image content of those pictures. In other words: I vote "no theme requirement". Just size. They should be the same as the regular avatars, so as to not interfere with the display of the more important text content of posts....IMO.
since url avatars are toggle-able via the userCP (and not 'on' by default) I see no particular reason to restrict the image content of those pictures. In other words: I vote "no theme requirement". Just size. They should be the same as the regular avatars, so as to not interfere with the display of the more important text content of posts....IMO.
The signature picture allows a patron to display any picture they like. I supposed I'd like avatars to be, well, avatars – representative of the poster in some fashion, and at least to some extent relevant to the board, i.e. something at least loosely to do with history and/or warfare. It's a pretty wide topic.
As for the size, I'm happy with the current limits. It shouldn't take up much more space, if you turn off system avatars, than people using the full signature picture allowance of 200 pixels. Therefore it should only interfere with board formatting to the same extent.
As for the size, I'm happy with the current limits. It shouldn't take up much more space, if you turn off system avatars, than people using the full signature picture allowance of 200 pixels. Therefore it should only interfere with board formatting to the same extent.
Talking theme, I'd prefer protraits - not necessarily connected with war (look at the MTW princesses for example) but ideally non-photographic in order to keep the 'look'.
That's not to say no photographs at all - Kaiser's Rommel (especially Tricky Lady's version of it) is quite nice at blending both photographic and artistic sensibilities in a way that a modern photograph wouldn't. There are various photoshop effects that can be used to 'stylise' a photo to make it less incongruous on these boards.
But...
When we're talking themes I think for the sanity of whoever gets lumbered with the monitoring job we have to be realistic in saying that these should be guidelines and not absolute requirements.
Say, we have a military/historical theme - what do we say to the person who wants to upload his Legolas avatar? There's a Middle Earth mod in progress in just the same way as a Napoleonic.
And what do we say to the person who wants Bart Simpson? Hey, we've got a Simpsons mod on the Forge right now! It's undeniably dead, but it's there. What about the guy who wants Han Solo or Yoda or, lord help us, Ja-Ja Binks?
Have guidelines, yes, say what's preferable in an avatar for these forums. But be realistic in that - within the bounds of legality and decency - you'll either have to allow people to use what they want or you'll have to put up with a lot of unnecessary grief.
That's one of my reasons for suggesting you just don't make a big deal about it, allow new joiners to pick a system avatar until they get used the boards and its atmosphere and they decide they want to hang around a while. Then when they go up to normal membership those that desperately want a custom avatar can upload one - and the ones who aren't too bothered will stick with the one they've already got.
I'm not saying, don't give them to junior members because they're second class citizens or anything like that, I'm just saying give them a chance to get familiar with the place first. In my opinion, it would be the best way to allow the maximum liberty with the minimum of hassle.
That's not to say no photographs at all - Kaiser's Rommel (especially Tricky Lady's version of it) is quite nice at blending both photographic and artistic sensibilities in a way that a modern photograph wouldn't. There are various photoshop effects that can be used to 'stylise' a photo to make it less incongruous on these boards.
But...
When we're talking themes I think for the sanity of whoever gets lumbered with the monitoring job we have to be realistic in saying that these should be guidelines and not absolute requirements.
Say, we have a military/historical theme - what do we say to the person who wants to upload his Legolas avatar? There's a Middle Earth mod in progress in just the same way as a Napoleonic.
And what do we say to the person who wants Bart Simpson? Hey, we've got a Simpsons mod on the Forge right now! It's undeniably dead, but it's there. What about the guy who wants Han Solo or Yoda or, lord help us, Ja-Ja Binks?
Have guidelines, yes, say what's preferable in an avatar for these forums. But be realistic in that - within the bounds of legality and decency - you'll either have to allow people to use what they want or you'll have to put up with a lot of unnecessary grief.
That's one of my reasons for suggesting you just don't make a big deal about it, allow new joiners to pick a system avatar until they get used the boards and its atmosphere and they decide they want to hang around a while. Then when they go up to normal membership those that desperately want a custom avatar can upload one - and the ones who aren't too bothered will stick with the one they've already got.
I'm not saying, don't give them to junior members because they're second class citizens or anything like that, I'm just saying give them a chance to get familiar with the place first. In my opinion, it would be the best way to allow the maximum liberty with the minimum of hassle.
If everyone agrees to the TW 'theme' then IMO it doesn't have to be historical or military in nature, rather cultural. Statues, shields, headdress, cartouche, vases, bookcover, buildings, tanks, paintings, it can be anything.
Personally, I have already have my custom avatar staked out. I'm only waiting for the agreed upon size so I can format it as such.
Personally, I have already have my custom avatar staked out. I'm only waiting for the agreed upon size so I can format it as such.
Originally Posted by Tricky Lady:
And what about this one? (just trying)
sweet thanks.And what about this one? (just trying)
This took 11kb. I think somewhere between 10 and 15 kb would be a good limit (maybe even, say...11kbs?)
Personally, I'd like to see the avatars retain some amount of 'Orgness', relating in history to some way, a pretty wide swath, methinks. And avoiding cartoonishness would be nice too.
Crazed Rabbit
I would like to see custum avatars but all uniform in size. Furthermore, a certain theme should be kept, i. e. TW theme.
10kb - 15kb seems to be a reasonable suggestion.
Quid
Ps: 500 posts in two and a half years; not bad at all !
10kb - 15kb seems to be a reasonable suggestion.
Quid
Ps: 500 posts in two and a half years; not bad at all
!Originally Posted by quid:
I would like to see custum avatars but all uniform in size. Furthermore, a certain theme should be kept, i. e. TW theme.
10kb - 15kb seems to be a reasonable suggestion.
Quid
Ps: 500 posts in two and a half years; not bad at all !
Hehe, I'm 815? (i don't know exact number, haven't checked recently) posts in 4 and a half weeks; not bad at all, lol I would like to see custum avatars but all uniform in size. Furthermore, a certain theme should be kept, i. e. TW theme.
10kb - 15kb seems to be a reasonable suggestion.
Quid
Ps: 500 posts in two and a half years; not bad at all
!
.I think custom avatars would be good but with a TW theme (maybe people could put their username under the portrait, that sorta stuff) or with a portrait theme, and again patrons could attach their username or other suitable info.
EDIT: 820 posts in fact
Hello,
I'm too tired atm to really add something here, but it seems that there's some common and diverging ground here. We'll try to reach a compromise about this soon.
Crazed Rabbit that avatar is below 10 kb. My guess is that you have a different blocksize on your HardDisk from the servers.
I'm too tired atm to really add something here, but it seems that there's some common and diverging ground here. We'll try to reach a compromise about this soon.
Crazed Rabbit that avatar is below 10 kb. My guess is that you have a different blocksize on your HardDisk from the servers.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO