Concerning Avatars - Keira Knightley.com Forums
Keira Knightley.com Forums  

Go Back   Keira Knightley.com Forums > Administratum > KeiraKnightley.com & Forum Issues

KeiraKnightley.com & Forum Issues Anything relating to the website and forums themselves. You post it, we'll answer it.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 26-09-2005, 11:35 PM   #1
Jasmine
Member
 
Jasmine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: keiras bed
Posts: 66
Question Concerning Avatars

Why are avatars restricted to 80 x 80? I think 100 x 100 would be convenient because then people could use their LiveJournal icons as avatars on the boards as well. I was just wondering if there was a specific reason 80 x 80 was the largest size avatars were allowed to be. I don't think 100 x 100 avatarts take up that much more bandwidth or take up that much more loading time...so why can't we have 100 x 100?
__________________

Broken Actually | MySpace | LiveJournal | DeviantArt
Jasmine is offline  
Old 26-09-2005, 11:48 PM   Senior Registered Member #2
Ashley
Senior Member
 
Ashley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kansas
Posts: 594
Why change something that's working, like the finely oiled machine that is KKW.....
__________________
Ashley is offline  
Old 26-09-2005, 11:52 PM   Senior Registered Member #3
deviljet88
KKW Sex Therapist
 
deviljet88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,814
vBulletin hates you.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardnax
Don't listen to Jet, he's mean to everybody.

8th KK posse member
Xanga
Playing now on Winamp
deviljet88 is offline  
Old 27-09-2005, 12:38 AM   Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! Moderator #4
acliff
llama llama duck
 
acliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: London
Posts: 1,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasmine
Why are avatars restricted to 80 x 80? I think 100 x 100 would be convenient because then people could use their LiveJournal icons as avatars on the boards as well. I was just wondering if there was a specific reason 80 x 80 was the largest size avatars were allowed to be. I don't think 100 x 100 avatarts take up that much more bandwidth or take up that much more loading time...so why can't we have 100 x 100?
If you really want, send a PM to someone who actually cares.

If it was 100x100, then i'd have to update my avatar... which i'm too lazy to do
__________________
Leave a message...
acliff is offline  
Old 27-09-2005, 12:41 AM   Lifetme Service Award Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! Retired Administrator #5
apoggy
Mmm Marmite
 
apoggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 1,274
so lazy in fact he is using one of my creations and taking all the credit....bitch
__________________
If this was school I would be expelled for poor attendance.
apoggy is offline  
Old 27-09-2005, 02:55 AM   Senior Registered Member #6
Jacoby
'The Flapper'
 
Jacoby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 2,647
NO ONE taunt Jasmine. There's a line from Marching Bands of Manhattan in the signature.

Win.

Edit// Nevermind. I don't care.
__________________
I'm only here to remind Brad to take his protein pills daily.
Jacoby is offline  
Old 30-09-2005, 03:11 AM   #7
Jasmine
Member
 
Jasmine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: keiras bed
Posts: 66
Allowing 100 x 100 avatars wouldn't mean that people wouldn't be able to use 80 x 80. Those using 80 x 80 would not be affected.. they'd only have the option of 100 x 100 if they wanted.. I say, if some people (like myself) would benefit from changing the rules, and no one will be negatively affected by the change, why not change it?

(And yes, Jacoby, that is DCFC in my sig. I love them.)
__________________

Broken Actually | MySpace | LiveJournal | DeviantArt
Jasmine is offline  
Old 30-09-2005, 03:54 AM   Lifetme Service Award Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! Retired Administrator #8
Liam
Bogan Elite
 
Liam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,446
The rules were created at the same time the forum was created, meaning the rules date back to the time when the majority of our users had dial-up internet. This may have changed since, but as long as some of our users are on 56k or slower internet, or have bandwidth limited accounts, it would be unfair to them to change.

I'll start a user poll in General Discussion to get an idea of internet speeds with a view to perhaps changing the size limit, but I won't be promising anything.
__________________
The greatest delight is to mark one's enemy, prepare everything, avenge oneself thoroughly, and then go to sleep.
-Stalin
Liam is offline  
Old 30-09-2005, 04:11 AM   Senior Registered Member #9
Rob The BLack Douglas
Senior Member
 
Rob The BLack Douglas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 450
100x100 avatars don't mess with load times on a dial up connection. I have dialup and the avatar's have not been a problem. Big pictures or banners in sigs can be a real problem. Also raising the size from 20k to 25k would be reasonable as well.
__________________
Friends are the family we choose.
Life is not measured by how many breaths we take, but by how many times our breath is taken away.
Love conquers all, let us too,yield to love!
To deny love is to deny life.
Love is as necessary as oxygen.
Avatar by Jasmine
http://www.livejournal.com/users/robslibrary/
http://www.myspace.com/kilted_robespierre
Rob The BLack Douglas is offline  
Old 30-09-2005, 12:35 PM   Lifetme Service Award Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! Retired Administrator #10
apoggy
Mmm Marmite
 
apoggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 1,274
i'm against some having 80x80 and some 100x100, it would make everything look disjointed, unaligned and generally messy.

have a 100x100 avatar you want to use? Resize it damn it.
__________________
If this was school I would be expelled for poor attendance.
apoggy is offline  
Old 30-09-2005, 12:42 PM   Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! KKWiki Contributer Senior Registered Member #11
Hazzle
Sponsored Cunt
 
Hazzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,168
Quote:
Originally Posted by apoggy
i'm against some having 80x80 and some 100x100, it would make everything look disjointed, unaligned and generally messy.

have a 100x100 avatar you want to use? Resize it damn it.
No offence mate but I think she's said elsewhere that the one's she's using IS a resized 100x100 but it doesn't look as good as it does in 100x100 because it looks squished.

She's just saying she'd like to use it as it's full size, I don't think she was being demanding, just asking a question.

That said, I'm against a mix and match approach too. Either everyone has 100x100 or noone. Unless you want to make it so mods/admins have 100x100? I've seen avatars used to distinguish mods/admins from conventional members on other forums so it might work...
Hazzle is offline  
Old 30-09-2005, 01:32 PM   First Class Member Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! KKWiki Contributer Administrator #12
Digital_Ice
 
Digital_Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 3,741
changing one avatar by 5kb or 20 px wouldnt make a difference to 56k users but if every avatar/signature that has to load is bigger, that value does add up, and if its a particularly slow day on the internet they could be there for hours.

personaly i couldnt give a shit, as im on 2.2mb bb, and my avatar is designed to be 80x80

(so dont put auto resise [up] on if you up the limit, i dont want it at 100x100)
__________________
Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
Digital_Ice is offline  
Old 01-10-2005, 12:58 AM   #13
Jasmine
Member
 
Jasmine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: keiras bed
Posts: 66
The reason I want the size to be raised to 100x100 is because I make LiveJournal icons that are that size like these. Many of those LJ icons have details that are ruined if resized..

For example, the avatar I'd like to use is:

Resize that to 80x80 and you get:
<-- ew. completely ruins it.

Some of you say that it would ruin the uniform look of everyone having the same size avatar... well, as of now, we're allowed to have avatars that are 80x80px or smaller. Mine is smaller so... right now the "uniform look" is being thrown off by people who use avatars smaller than 80x80. My avatar right now is like 30px bellow 80 & you guys aren't getting freaked out about that. So why would it matter if some people chose to have their avatars 20px larger?
__________________

Broken Actually | MySpace | LiveJournal | DeviantArt
Jasmine is offline  
Old 01-10-2005, 01:36 AM   Lifetme Service Award Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! Retired Administrator #14
Liam
Bogan Elite
 
Liam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,446
You are missing the point.

KKW has a set bandwidth cap. If we exceed this cap, we are offline for the remainder of the paid month. With the number of users of the forum, plus all the lurkers - all of whom download the avatars to their computer when they visit, the 5-10k difference begins to add up. The forums themselves use a fair chunk of our monthly bandwidth as is. I'm sure everyone would rather have 80x80 and a working site than 100x100 and a site offline for 7 days a month.

And besides, why change something that isnt broken?
__________________
The greatest delight is to mark one's enemy, prepare everything, avenge oneself thoroughly, and then go to sleep.
-Stalin
Liam is offline  
Old 01-10-2005, 04:42 AM   #15
Jasmine
Member
 
Jasmine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: keiras bed
Posts: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liam
You are missing the point.

KKW has a set bandwidth cap. If we exceed this cap, we are offline for the remainder of the paid month. With the number of users of the forum, plus all the lurkers - all of whom download the avatars to their computer when they visit, the 5-10k difference begins to add up. The forums themselves use a fair chunk of our monthly bandwidth as is. I'm sure everyone would rather have 80x80 and a working site than 100x100 and a site offline for 7 days a month.
(alright well maybe i missed that point because nobody ever really brought it up...) So you really think that 20 pixels will make that much of a difference? I know that you have a lot of users and lurkers and whatnot, but why do the avatars have to use up kkw bandwidth? In other boards I'm at people can link to off-site avatars that are hosted elsewhere and use that bandwidth. Is this not possible at KKW? I mean I'd have no problem hosting my stuff on photobucket or whatever.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Liam
And besides, why change something that isnt broken?
Because it inconveniences some people.
__________________

Broken Actually | MySpace | LiveJournal | DeviantArt
Jasmine is offline  
Old 01-10-2005, 05:17 AM   Lifetme Service Award Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! Retired Administrator #16
Liam
Bogan Elite
 
Liam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,446
Any image hosted anywhere on any website is downloaded to a users computer when the site is viewed. This uses the site's bandwidth. Unfortunately, thats how the internet works. A lot of people host their avatars on-site here, using the upload feature. 20 pixels may not sound like much, but when you are running a site the size of KKW, any saving you can make contributes to saving on the bandwidth bill.

I will talk to Baz and Poggs about it, but I'm fairly sure the status quo will remain in place for a little while longer.

Edit: I'm informed that all avatars are uploaded to KKW server space, regardless of where they are hosted.
__________________
The greatest delight is to mark one's enemy, prepare everything, avenge oneself thoroughly, and then go to sleep.
-Stalin

Last edited by Liam; 01-10-2005 at 06:31 AM.
Liam is offline  
Old 01-10-2005, 11:42 AM   Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! Moderator #17
acliff
llama llama duck
 
acliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: London
Posts: 1,818
On a seperate note, I reckon we should bring back post counts.
You might think I'm crazy, but I've got my reasons.
__________________
Leave a message...
acliff is offline  
Old 01-10-2005, 12:24 PM   Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! KKWiki Contributer Senior Registered Member #18
Hazzle
Sponsored Cunt
 
Hazzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,168
Quote:
Originally Posted by acliff
On a seperate note, I reckon we should bring back post counts.
You might think I'm crazy, but I've got my reasons.
Really? I can't see what good it'd do, but maybe you can.

What would those reasons be then?

As for the avatars, why don't we leave it to Liam to discuss (when he gets round to it ) with Poggs and Baz and leave it at that for now? It's 80x80 for now, if and when the possibility of changing that is confirmed, then we can discuss it.

The fact is, as Liam said, if the Bandwidth usage is going to be that much more that it risks KKW being down for a few days every month, it's not worth it.
Hazzle is offline  
Old 01-10-2005, 01:04 PM   Officer #19
Flightfreak
Stalker Boi
 
Flightfreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 678
Let the avatar size like it is. Every site has other rules if it comes to avatar sizes. Maybe in an other month we will be having someone who is used to use a 120x120 pix avatar on an other forum. 80x80 is good. resizing an avatar takes how long? 1min

Adding the post count back would make people post more crap I think. because they want to have a higher post count or something. now you can check the amount of posts in the profile.
__________________
....-> 3rd Member Of Keira Knightleyz Posse!<-.....
The lobbying groups all hate him and thats a good sign.
You may laugh because I'm different, but I laugh because you're all the same! Quote Narg aka Brendon Gilson RIP
Flightfreak is offline  
Old 01-10-2005, 03:20 PM   Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! KKWiki Contributer Senior Registered Member #20
Hazzle
Sponsored Cunt
 
Hazzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flightfreak
resizing an avatar takes how long? 1min
You're right about everything else but I really wish people would stop going on about how little time it takes to resize. The gripe wasn't about the effort it takes to resize but about the effect resizing has on the image.

Quote:
The reason I want the size to be raised to 100x100 is because I make LiveJournal icons that are that size like these. Many of those LJ icons have details that are ruined if resized..
See? (Incidentally it's not about use on another forum, but the fact that 100x100 is standard on LJ and lots of people use LJ, far more than visit KKW, in fact. If anything 100x100 has become a bit of a standard size because of that. Most avatars I find online are 100x100, I just resize them).

I mean I resized my avatar, I didn't particularly mind the time, however the fact that the quality was reduced a little pissed me off a bit. Not enough to make a big deal out of it, but I can understand the point that's being made, which has nothing to do with how long it takes to resize or how much effort (or lack thereof) but more to do with the quality of the final product.

However as Liam pointed out the quality improvement would come at a cost and if that cost (the extra bandwidth) would mean the site being down for any length of time it's not worth doing. If it can be done without a significant extra cost in terms of bandwidth, then I think it's a good move, as 100x100 has become pretty much a web standard, but if it can't, then so what? We'll be a bit different and leave it as is for the good of the site
Hazzle is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
By appointment to HM Keira Knightley.