Raise signature size limit

[SystemViper]

19kb is sufficient for ANY signature. If anyone here needs more quality thats too bad. My sigs are all great quality. If you cannot get it under a size, you are not using the "save for web" option in photoshop.

I PROMISE I use photoshop more than ANY of you, so please take my advice when I say 19kb is MORE than enough.

I'm sorry but i make my own decisions and while i appreciate your advice, i will have to respectfully disagree. I also use Photoshop and use "save for web" where needed. I actually I think it's a little rude for you to say what is more or less then enough for me, Do i tell you what i think you need, thing or is sufficient?


If you could back up your broad statements with some kind of insight that is relative to the topic, i am all ears, but a blanket statement..

I PROMISE I use photoshop more than ANY of you, so please take my advice when I say 19kb is MORE than enough.

I'm sure you drive a car (well maybe) but does that mean you can tell me how to drive or what car is good for me?
.
.
.
.

 

[PVTCaboose1337]

I'm sorry but i make my own decisions and while i appreciate your advice, i will have to respectfully disagree. I also use Photoshop and use "save for web" where needed. I actually I think it's a little rude for you to say what is more or less then enough for me, Do i tell you what i think you need, thing or is sufficient?


If you could back up your broad statements with some kind of insight that is relative to the topic, i am all ears, but a blanket statement..

I'm sure you drive a car (well mabye) but does that mean you can tell me how to drive or what car is good for me?

I'm sorry if you were offended by my comments. Just to show the difference:

Here is worst quality: (7.29kb)

Here is best quality: (77.81kb)

Here is med quality: (just under 19kb)

The colors in max quality are just a BIT better than med quality. Same with sharpness. It is almost not noticeable to an average forumgoer.

 

[imperialreign]

19kb is sufficient for ANY signature. If anyone here needs more quality thats too bad. My sigs are all great quality. If you cannot get it under a size, you are not using the "save for web" option in photoshop.

I PROMISE I use photoshop more than ANY of you, so please take my advice when I say 19kb is MORE than enough.

It's not so much as getting the image under our size restrictions, as it is that in some cases it affects IQ to a noticeable degree.

I'm not trying to argue with you at all, from one PS user to the next; I know my ways around PS quite well myself for the type of work I do . . . but, take my earlier image I had posted on page 1, for example . . .

if you can explain to me how to cut the image quality in such a way as to not induce blurring, gamma correction, or pixelation - I'd be ecstatic. Although I'm not happy with the final image quality myself, there's nothing else I can really do with it. Personally, I don't like submitting a work like that to a user for approval, especially when the pixelation is blatantly obvious . . . it leaves me feeling that the final work isn't on par with what it should be.

Perhaps the work I do just gets too complex to allow for a good compression/IQ ratio, I'm not sure - I'm open to suggestions!

 

[SystemViper]

I think you thinking is flawed, you state that ..

It is almost not noticeable to an average forumgoer.

It isn't noticeable to them, i agree with you

If i design something that i want to put out there to represent something, it has to be good enough for me. My target is not the average forumgoer but i's my own standards.
Like the other guy said, he doesn't even notice that. I do higer qualiy work if possible for myself and for people that appriciate the subtle quality differences.

I think there is a difference between 20k compressed and 50k, I can see it and I notice it. So if TPU felt that they could indulge my creative side with my art then that would make me happy, if they don't then that is their call, so i support Mussels in his asking for a small increase in size.
Not debating creative compression methods or bandwith and storage usage. That is up to TPU to determine where they want to improve their forum and where they don't.

Frankly I am glad to be a part of this forum and would support it no matter what, but I think that giving creative people better support in the way of an extra 30k in banner size a very cool thing to do. And if thy don't I am not going anywhere.


TPU Rocks
.
.
.
.

 

[PVTCaboose1337]

I think you thinking is flawed, you state that ..



If i design something that i want to put out there to represent something, it has to be good enough for me. My target is not the average forumgoer but i's my own standards.
Like the other guy said, he doesn't even notice that. I do higer qualiy work if possible for myself and for people that appriciate the subtle quality differences.

I think there is a difference between 20k compressed and 50k, I can see it and I notice it. So if TPU felt that they could indulge my creatice side with my art then that would make me happy, if they don't they that is their call, so i support Mussels in his asking for a small increase in size.
Not debating creative compression methods or bandwith and storage usage. That is up to TPU to determine where they want to improve their forum and where they don't.

Frankly I am glad to be a part of this forum and would support it no matter what, but I think that giving creative people better support in the way of an extra 30k in banner size a very cool thing to do. And if thy don't I am not going anywhere.


TPU Rocks
.
.
.
.

I agree, it is noticeable, but is it necessary? I asked way back when for an increase in size too. I agree, I can see how the extra 30k would help, but when it comes down to it, my standards are high, but I have learned to accept the 19k and optimize towards it. Overall would it be helpful? Yes. Is it necessary? No. Will the increase make W1z happy? No. Will it make most users happy? Yes. Do I want it to be increased? Sure. Do I think it needs to be increased? No.

 

[newtekie1]

Uh-huh . . . so, I can go make a sig that's 5MB in size, and it's permissable if it's via an offsite link?

Last I checked, offsite image links for sigs over our size and dimensions limit weren't allowed, either - but, hey, that gives me a thought . . . seeing as how our TPU image hosting is free, why not upload maximum image size per our dimensions limit and then link those? I mean, it's not offsite anymore . . . as long as we don't mind the TPU image hosting watermark.

but - that would be abusing a free service provided by us.

offsite linking also slows down page load times as well - much more than a local, larger image size would

No, sig images still have to be reasonable, but in general no one really cares if you are using an external hosting for the image as long as it is still reasonable. The demensions have to stay at 500x100 on picks in the sig, but they can be over the 19kb.

So you speak for TPU. What bothers me is when people can't make a real argument/responce about the point, they try to make the issue about something it's not. Do you know if TPU complains about sigs taking up to much space? I am wondering why you get so mad an argue like you are paying the TPU hosting fees or are a owner or even have anything to do with the things that you say bother you. Please explain to me how you can speak for TPU or their point of view. Who are you?

I would think the OP can speak for TPU more then you an he made the post and is a moderator.

They aren't trying to improve the site, in fact their idea would only make the site worse. Increased bandwidth usage is defintely an issue relating to this topic. What bothers me most is when someone wants to get their way, and they completely ignore the down sides for others.

I don't have anything to do with the hosting fees of TPU, however I do understand the concept of hosting fees, and have to deal with it on a daily basis. I've had several clients that have had to shut down sites because they couldn't pay hosting fees because of a free service that users took advantage of. If TPU as a whole suffers because the hosting fees go up, it definitely affects me. And yes, I am going to get angry when selfish users complain about a free service because they don't think it is good enough, and want TPU to put out more money because they are selfish.

Also who's complaining, Mussels asked about the idea of larger banner size for the sigs. I didn't take that as complaining as much as exploring a way that might enhance the site for some people.

Why are you getting so mad about this, we are are only trying to explore this as a possibility and take into consideration everyones feelings, comments and especially idea's so i don't see why your so offended,

All the people that are saying it isn't big enough, and it hurts image quality, are complaining.

Negative, just tried, external images have the follow the same size, 19KB.

Check my image, it is more than 19kb. If you want a bigger image in your sig, use the IMG tag to insert it from an external site. Don't use the upload tool at the bottom of the sig page, as even when you put in an external link, it hosts the image on TPU servers.

 

[SystemViper]

You know my side, I just say i agree that we disagree, I am for the added 30k in banner size. but i just have to comment on this....

They aren't trying to improve the site,

So you are saying that TPU isn' trying to improve their site???

That has to be the comment of the week!

 

[SystemViper]

I agree, it is noticeable, but is it necessary? I asked way back when for an increase in size too. I agree, I can see how the extra 30k would help, but when it comes down to it, my standards are high, but I have learned to accept the 19k and optimize towards it. Overall would it be helpful? Yes. Is it necessary? No. Will the increase make W1z happy? No. Will it make most users happy? Yes. Do I want it to be increased? Sure. Do I think it needs to be increased? No.

So now you got my head spinning?>>

here is the OP...

While i understand the goal of keeping sigs small to save bandwidth and prevent lag, i really would like it increased a little. its very hard when you get a great sig made, and its got to be compressed so heavily that it goes blurry and stops looking good.

Not asking for something ridiculous here, just a small increase.

Current size is around 19KB i beleive, i'd like that raised to the 30-50KB range.

Any comments?

Where does it says
"it has to be needed"
"is it necessary"?????
"Will the increase make W1z happy?" :shadedshu

Who asked those questions. Why did you think that you need to stand against it, "just trust you", I think was your original post, "i don't need it"?
why not read the OP and keep true to his direction...

"I agree, it is noticeable,"\
"I can see how the extra 30k would help"
"Overall would it be helpful? Yes"
"Will it make most users happy? Yes. "
"Do I want it to be increased? Sure.


nuff said
.

.
.

 

[PVTCaboose1337]

So now you got my head spinning?>>

here is the OP...



Where does it says
"it has to be needed"
"is it necessary"?????
"Will the increase make W1z happy?" :shadedshu

Who asked those questions. Why did you think that you need to stand against it, "just trust you", I think was your original post, "i don't need it"?
why not read the OP and keep true to his direction...

"I agree, it is noticeable,"\
"I can see how the extra 30k would help"
"Overall would it be helpful? Yes"
"Will it make most users happy? Yes. "
"Do I want it to be increased? Sure.


nuff said
.

.
.

I'm just playing devil's advocate. Don't worry my friend, I'm not against you, I just know W1z will not go for it. Good luck, but it is up to the one man / split personality of 2 shy lesbians to choose.

 

[SystemViper]

Hey, i'm not worrying, I don't use banners except when i want to make a statement, also this isn't personal,i just felt it was a good idea .
I felt it was a valid request. I don't know W1z but like his site and support any decisions, but playing devils advocate against what your about, now that is a little crazy, I thought creative sorts stick togethr.
You know overclocking is very creative, this is very much an expression of art....

Bling vs. getto, air vs xtreme but it all comes down to how creative you are with all the little things, love this stuff

I just thought there would be more support :shadedshu

and how some people fought against it no holes barred and it wasn't even a vote thread but just "any comments"

WOW!
.
.
.

 

[3870x2]

19kb is sufficient for ANY signature. If anyone here needs more quality thats too bad. My sigs are all great quality. If you cannot get it under a size, you are not using the "save for web" option in photoshop.

I PROMISE I use photoshop more than ANY of you, so please take my advice when I say 19kb is MORE than enough.

photoshop is a very expensive program, so all of you need to go out and spend that $600 RIGHT NOW so you can use your "save for web" option. WTF?

also, please dont make promises you cant keep, there are those of us (me and my wife, for her photography business) spend days at a time on photoshop, because it is their job. We use a $1000 Nikon D60 w/ lenses, and we get paid to do weddings, parties, birthdays, senior pictues, etc... along with doing work for sears photography.

This isnt a thread to put others down private caboose 1337(?), its just a request for a higher sig, dont use it if you dont want to.
good day, friend.

 

[3870x2]

No, sig images still have to be reasonable, but in general no one really cares if you are using an external hosting for the image as long as it is still reasonable. The demensions have to stay at 500x100 on picks in the sig, but they can be over the 19kb.



They aren't trying to improve the site, in fact their idea would only make the site worse. Increased bandwidth usage is defintely an issue relating to this topic. What bothers me most is when someone wants to get their way, and they completely ignore the down sides for others.

I don't have anything to do with the hosting fees of TPU, however I do understand the concept of hosting fees, and have to deal with it on a daily basis. I've had several clients that have had to shut down sites because they couldn't pay hosting fees because of a free service that users took advantage of. If TPU as a whole suffers because the hosting fees go up, it definitely affects me. And yes, I am going to get angry when selfish users complain about a free service because they don't think it is good enough, and want TPU to put out more money because they are selfish.

EDIT: just saw your post newtekie, going to try it right now, and ill thank you for it if it works




All the people that are saying it isn't big enough, and it hurts image quality, are complaining.




Check my image, it is more than 19kb. If you want a bigger image in your sig, use the IMG tag to insert it from an external site. Don't use the upload tool at the bottom of the sig page, as even when you put in an external link, it hosts the image on TPU servers.

also newtekie, they still have to be 19kb, i just tried a 40kb image from my website, and it said file size too large. It is the same exact image that im using in my sig right now, just with less compresson, so it isnt the physical size.
EDIT: sry, double posting like a newb mofo here, but as you can see ive only 3.29 posts per day, it is purely unintentional.

 

[Mussels]

I agree the dimensions are fine - but some sig images, the amount of compression necessary to reach out kb cap can get ridiculous, and some images are more prone to the artifacting than others.

.jpg format, optimized at 55% quality (25kb)

.jpg format, optimized at 50% quality (19kb)

[/CENTER]

This is a good example of what i mean: 25KB instead of 19KB. while it may vary on your screen, on here the color difference in the text is massive. its the difference between a bright neon green and a dull, dark green.

 

[cdawall]

photoshop is a very expensive program, so all of you need to go out and spend that $600 RIGHT NOW so you can use your "save for web" option. WTF?

also, please dont make promises you cant keep, there are those of us (me and my wife, for her photography business) spend days at a time on photoshop, because it is their job. We use a $1000 Nikon D60 w/ lenses, and we get paid to do weddings, parties, birthdays, senior pictues, etc... along with doing work for sears photography.

This isnt a thread to put others down private caboose 1337(?), its just a request for a higher sig, dont use it if you dont want to.
good day, friend.

you could spend nothing and learn to use GIMP

This is a good example of what i mean: 25KB instead of 19KB. while it may vary on your screen, on here the color difference in the text is massive. its the difference between a bright neon green and a dull, dark green.

use a .PNG and edit your palette you can reduce size and keep the same quality

 

[3870x2]

i can see it perfectly, as you can see the bottom picture has a faded tint. Speaking of which, how do you like your sennheiser headphones? I had some sennheiser CX400s that i bought in iraq for about $90 (msrp 120 or so), had them stolen, liked them so much i ordered them again, although they are less now.
yes, if you know how to utilize Gimp it can be as powerful as photoshop. I use macromedia fireworks as much as photoshop, and now that its been bought out, fireworks integrates with photoshop.

 

[cdawall]

i can see it perfectly, as you can see the bottom picture has a faded tint. Speaking of which, how do you like your sennheiser headphones? I had some sennheiser CX400s that i bought in iraq for about $90 (msrp 120 or so), had them stolen, liked them so much i ordered them again, although they are less now.
yes, if you know how to utilize Gimp it can be as powerful as photoshop. I use macromedia fireworks as much as photoshop, and now that its been bought out, fireworks integrates with photoshop.

if your cheap you can us paint shop pro its very good for the cost and i have like 8 copies i got free with stuff lol

 

[Athlon2K15]

all you chilli peppers need banned for exciting a riot.


EDIT: hello erocker

 

[erocker]

all you chilli peppers need banned for exciting a riot.


EDIT: hello erocker

What? Did you see I was looking at this thread? I have absolutely no comment regarding any of this.

 

[btarunr]

Also that 20k shouldn't impact the loading times and if it does, there should be a setting to turn all sig's off.

I say give it a 1 month trial, then see what problems arise and what they specifically are, rather then trying to hear opinions.

It will. In a thread's page (default 24 posts/page), even if 15 people have 40KB sigpics, that's an extra 300 KB to load.

And you think "trying it out" sounds logistical? If it doesn't work out, what to expect us to, PM everyone with 40KB sigpic to have them removed? The software won't block uploading sigpics upto 40 KB in size during the "trial period", while after it, if decided against, the software won't "block" your 40 KB sigpic that's already uploaded, it will merely enforce the older 19.5 KB limit when you upload fresh sigpics. So "trying out" isn't a good option.

 

[imperialreign]

No, sig images still have to be reasonable, but in general no one really cares if you are using an external hosting for the image as long as it is still reasonable. The demensions have to stay at 500x100 on picks in the sig, but they can be over the 19kb.

not if a mod takes note of it - every once in a while, especially in GN, you're likely to run across a post by a mod asking another user to fix their sig because it's over our size limit - and the only way to get around that restriction is to hard-link to the image itself.

I'll say most of the time it goes unnoticed, as it's typically only new users that will do this, and I've never seen anyone put up a fight about it, either. What they do let slide are the images such as what's in your sig, or HWbot sigs, etc - but those images don't really breach the 19kb limit by too much.

use a .PNG and edit your palette you can reduce size and keep the same quality

this is a possibility - but it eliminates the greenish "glow" that I had wanted around the blue text. I was hopign to merge the two colors associated with Intel/nVidia for his sig . . .


what happens with the higher compression to reach the 19k, the fog-like glow is reduced to pixelation, and that color is blurred with the surrounding blue from the text, creating an almost bleed-like effect.

If you take a look at the barely compressed, 100% quality image, you can clearly see what I was going for - the text is a bluish color, surrounded by a warm-green glow. The colors I picked were very close in saturation to each other so that they would blend well side-by-side. The final compressed image, though, negates that effect.

 

[btarunr]

Check my image, it is more than 19kb. If you want a bigger image in your sig, use the IMG tag to insert it from an external site. Don't use the upload tool at the bottom of the sig page, as even when you put in an external link, it hosts the image on TPU servers.

Even if externally linked, the 19.5 KB rule stays. With that rule, the forum staff isn't trying to "reduce the load on its own servers", but rather making sure someone from Iraq with a 256 kbps connection gets the same experience as someone with a 20 Mbps connection in Europe. TPU's servers dole out dozens of terabytes of data every year. It's never been a bandwidth issue on its side.

W1z, however made exceptions for F@H, Hwbot sigpics that are live-updated, so you're free to use that. You're not free to do so with "fun" graphics sigpics.

 

[cdawall]

not if a mod takes note of it - every once in a while, especially in GN, you're likely to run across a post by a mod asking another user to fix their sig because it's over our size limit - and the only way to get around that restriction is to hard-link to the image itself.

I'll say most of the time it goes unnoticed, as it's typically only new users that will do this, and I've never seen anyone put up a fight about it, either. What they do let slide are the images such as what's in your sig, or HWbot sigs, etc - but those images don't really breach the 19kb limit by too much.






this is a possibility - but it eliminates the greenish "glow" that I had wanted around the blue text. I was hopign to merge the two colors associated with Intel/nVidia for his sig . . .


what happens with the higher compression to reach the 19k, the fog-like glow is reduced to pixelation, and that color is blurred with the surrounding blue from the text, creating an almost bleed-like effect.

If you take a look at the barely compressed, 100% quality image, you can clearly see what I was going for - the text is a bluish color, surrounded by a warm-green glow. The colors I picked were very close in saturation to each other so that they would blend well side-by-side. The final compressed image, though, negates that effect.

pm me the original and i will try and get it under 19K without killing it

 

[SystemViper]

It will. In a thread's page (default 24 posts/page), even if 15 people have 40KB sigpics, that's an extra 300 KB to load.

And you think "trying it out" sounds logistical? If it doesn't work out, what to expect us to, PM everyone with 40KB sigpic to have them removed? The software won't block uploading sigpics upto 40 KB in size during the "trial period", while after it, if decided against, the software won't "block" your 40 KB sigpic that's already uploaded, it will merely enforce the older 19.5 KB limit when you upload fresh sigpics. So "trying out" isn't a good option.

I think that is why it's discussed, to flush out what works and what doesn't.
It's always better to have many minds working together to figure something out.
But at least i was trying to find solutions, middle ground and creative solutions and not just being negative or overly positive without backing up my support with idea's.
.
.
.

 

[Polaris573]

Signature pictures with increased pixel count clutter the forums. I have been to other forums with larger signature pictures and I don't like it. Which is why we enforce the 500x100 size constraint.

Whether you like it or not some people have slower "broadband connections" of less than 1 Mb/s and an increase of file size does slow down their page load times. Furthermore, there is the increased cost of storage and bandwidth and the money comes from W1zzard, ultimately making this his decision.

I feel like a broken record.

Be nice to each other people, I don't understand all the infantile posturing and squabbling over this subject. The guilty people know who they are. If it wasn't midnight CST I would go through and name individual names just to make sure they got it, but maybe later.

 

[imperialreign]

pm me the original and i will try and get it under 19K without killing it

I'll see what I can do

Signature pictures with increased pixel count clutter the forums. I have been to other forums with larger signature pictures and I don't like it. Which is why we enforce the 500x100 size constraint.

Whether you like it or not some people have slower "broadband connections" of less than 1 Mb/s and an increase of file size does slow down their page load times. Furthermore, there is the increased cost of storage and bandwidth and the money comes from W1zzard, ultimately making this his decision.

I feel like a broken record.

Be nice to each other people, I don't understand all the infantile posturing and squabbling over this subject. The guilty people know who they are. If it wasn't midnight CST I would go through and name individual names just to make sure they got it, but maybe later.

agreed - it boils down to w1z's decision. I kinda tired of re-iterating myself here as well, I've said my piece, I've made my points, I'm now done with this thread.