Allow higher avatars?

[Neikos 968]

In an average post, the height of the post largely exceed those of a normal sized avatar, which means that higher avatars would not disturb the layout while still providing that little inch more for user customizations.

Here is why I think it is so low right now:

Forums exist since the beginning of the mainstream internet. Bandwidth was few though, so if you were allowed an avatar it had to be low res. Once forum software was freely available and everyone and their mom could make a forum and it's 'default' settings did not change, which is: a square avatar not larger than <~200 pixels. 

 

 

So my question is, why not change the height limit? It is only fair since it doesn't affect anybody negatively and would only make this a more interactive place

[Shiki 5,855]

y u no donate?

[Killian Jones 2,655]

150x150 seems fair, and 150x200 for donators is also fair.

 

Hell I could use a larger avatar but instead I lazily use Gravatar.

 

I don't know if this is needed, especially if avatars are hosted on site.

[Neikos 968]

y u no donate?

 

This has nothing to do with donations, since as Feld0 put it. You should donate because you want to support the forums financially, not to get a higher res avatar.

[Killian Jones 2,655]

This has nothing to do with donations, since as Feld0 put it. You should donate because you want to support the forums financially, not to get a higher res avatar.

To be fair, the end justifies the means. People donate to get a fancier avatar, bigger signature, bigger avatar. As a small perk, because only this way does the site stay free for everyone else. Which is important that MLP Forums remains a free service.

[Shiki 5,855]

This has nothing to do with donations, since as Feld0 put it. You should donate because you want to support the forums financially, not to get a higher res avatar.

I'm pretty sure Feld0 isn't going to complain whatever the intentions behind the donations are, because money is money.

 

I was just being silly, hence meme speak.

 

However, I do somewhat mean something. If you really absolutely want one, you could donate. Don't think it's all that worth it, anyway. It's only 50 pixels taller. I donate just because I want to. 

 

Also for the signature

 

---

 

More OT:

I don't really see the need to increase it. Doubt it'd be much work, if any, at all, and I have this gut feeling that images a few kilobytes bigger aren't going to mess with the servers, so it's not like there's much opposition other than the say of admins (or just Feld0's say, whatever it may be).

 

I'm not going to complain if I get bigger images, so I'll "support" it, I suppose.

[Neikos 968]

150x150 seems fair, and 150x200 for donators is also fair.

 

Hell I could use a larger avatar but instead I lazily use Gravatar.

 

I don't know if this is needed, especially if avatars are hosted on site.

 

 

It also isn't about whether it's needed or not, or else I will ask you why this place even exists. It's about trying to not get into conformism.

 

I do see what you try to point out in your last line, bandwidth and storage place. Well, allowing 93 pixels more in height would mean that you have in total 93*150 pixels added.

 

Let's do some maths.

 

A png file is encoded in pixels of normally 24bits. So: 93*150*24= 41850*8 bits. So that extra part is 42 kb of more image. ( At the worst possible case, which is when they are all of a different color. )

 

Now how much is 42kb? 

 

this random image here is ~40kb:

Will the servers really be overloaded here?

 

 

I used the number 93 as the additional number of pixels because 150*1.618 = 242.7 so it gives you a golden rectangle.

 

[Jokuc 8,173]

I'm a member of another forum where the maximum size for avatars is 75x75 px. 150x150 seems just fine to me but I understand you.

[NavelColt 22,880]

No. IMO, we're overtly lenient in our avatar sizes. 100 pixels to 150 is the norm for most forums, with some places being as low as 50. You can crop any avatar you have that's portraity into a 200X150 size.

[Neikos 968]

No. IMO, we're overtly lenient in our avatar sizes. 100 pixels to 150 is the norm for most forums, with some places being as low as 50. You can crop any avatar you have that's portraity into a 200X150 size.

 

Lenient in contrast to what? Is there a transcending rule I am unable to see?

[Concord 1,982]

Hello!

 

I believe that regular memebers shouldn't get the extended avatar priveleges... As you may know, donating to the forums allows you to have a bigger avatar. I believe 200 x 150 if i'm not mistaken, while the default avatar size is 150 x 150.

 

The Forums need the income, that they may receive from people donating, to stay alive. These priveleges that are offered to subscriber memebers encourage people to donate. A lot less people would donate, if these priveleges were availabe to everyone. And thus, a lot less money would be invested in the improvement of the Forums, Poniverse.

 

The avatars are quite big and look very nice compared to some other forums, and i think we should be happy with what we already have.

Edited April 9, 2013 by Concord

[Shift 4,272]

Donate, my friend. The avatars currently are just fine as it is.

[Neikos 968]

I find it funny how about half of the posts here are "Donate" like if I was looking for a practical solution. I was not, I kind of hoped to get a reason which is not "Restrict it so that we can sell it" but it seems that is is on purpose.
I myself don't really care about something like this on a forum, but I still find it sad that such a 'solution' has to exist.

[Shift 4,272]

Fly, it is the only solution. We already have bigger avatars than most forums. Why make them bigger? It's only 50 pixels.