Change the allowed avatar file size...

[namkcuR]

So I was trying to change my avatar today and I am informed that my file goes over the 7000Byte limit. That's 7 KB. That's too small. I want to put an animated GIF for my avatar and it's hard to make an animated GF 7KB or under. I understand if you don't want files like that slowing down the Interference server...so don't allow files of more than 7KB if the user is uploading the avatar to the server. But if the user is getting the avatar from another site, such as an image uploading site(i.e.imageshack), why not just link to the image directly rather than grabbing it and putting it here? Sites like that usually don't have a problem with hotlinking, that's why they exist. That way, there would be a way to have larger-sized avatars without killing the Interference server.

The avatar I want could be anywhere from 30KB to 500KB. I really want to be able to link offsite to it.

 

[Bonochick]

I don't think it's just about killing the Interference server though. It's also about how fast the page loads. That's why we limit the size of images and gifs in people's sigs, even when those are linked from elsewhere.

 

[gareth brown]

why would they change it for one person?

 

[indra]

I want my avatar larger too, 'cause at the size it is right now the guy looks angry and in the original painting he doesn't.

 

[Liesje]

The avatar I want could be anywhere from 30KB to 500KB. I really want to be able to link offsite to it.

You can pay a dollar and put it in your sig.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

i think the dimensions for the pic are a bit too small and i think they should be increased to 100x100 pixels, but the size of the file itself i understand and don't really have a problem working with.

the difference between 100 pixels and 72 may not seem much, but it can make the picture look weird. maybe it's just me.

 

[namkcuR]

i think the dimensions for the pic are a bit too small and i think they should be increased to 100x100 pixels, but the size of the file itself i understand and don't really have a problem working with.

the difference between 100 pixels and 72 may not seem much, but it can make the picture look weird. maybe it's just me.

I'm just the opposite...it'd be nice if the image was bigger but I can have a smaller one too. But 7KB for a file size is ridiculous if you ask me.

 

[LoveTown]

I agree. There are so many cool avatars on here that just don't look good because they are too tiny.

 

[Sicy]

Personally, I agree that 72x72 and 7kb is a bit small. However, I understand why its that way. There are so many users here that if the avatars were bigger (both ways) it would really slow down the loading of the threads, especially for those poor souls with dial up.

I'd be happy with at least 80x80 and 10kb, I dont think that's too much to ask.

 

[Chizip]

well youre the captain here, so make the change

 

[Sicy]

This needs to be cleared with the boss man.

 

[Elvis]

Sorry, this isnt changing.

It hasnt been a problem so far. And as someone said, if you want a larger image as part of every post you make, put it in your signature.

Where an image loads from doesnt matter.... it still ads to the 'download weight' of the page.

 

[LoveTown]

heh thanks for the response Elvis. Well guys, now we know where we stand. Start finding those sig pics!