Jump to content

Forum Avatars


guk

Recommended Posts

I changed my avatar recently, and it was not that easy because of the 50kb size limit.

The page recommends "200px or larger", but a 200x200 JPEG already exceeds that with compression level 100. And even with a near-lossless level of 98-99 it still looks heavily compressed in the profile image and its smaller forum counterpart.

 

Would it really hurt the site bandwith to increase it slightly, perhaps to 100kb?

 

For the sake of quality, it would be ideal to have a PNG fit in there.

BTW the actual size of the profile avatar seems to be 138x138, unless i'm completely mistaken - however my current PNG in 172x172 also looks very blurry and compressed compared to its original:

 

 

ZORDFYrf_o.png

 

 

 

4568-0-1502767327.png

 

 

 

Link to comment

Png in 138x138, 43kb disk / 40kb image server. Mashup selfie scaled down to 138x138 in gimp.

To correct the inevitable blur effect caused by a scale-down you've to resharpen it again.

However, a mere 32kb are the final online result on LL, thus not 1:1 in quality / sharpness,

actually a loss of some 25%. That's a lot, caused exclusively by the forums software used.

 

ana-surena10bsyu65.png

Link to comment

Yeah i tried 138x138 but that looked even worse. Somehow it takes several attempts until the new avatar is accepted, my profile still shows an outdated pic while the forums got the new one.

Anyways that doesn't really answer the request for a larger filesize (and not further compressing the pics). 50kb would have been noteworthy in the 1990's, but nowadays where 100mbit are the norm and webspace is counted in giga- and terabytes, it seems a bit overly restrictive.

Link to comment

Yeah i tried 138x138 but that looked even worse. Somehow it takes several attempts until the new avatar is accepted, my profile still shows an outdated pic while the forums got the new one.

 

Anyways that doesn't really answer the request for larger filesize (and not further compressing the pics). 50kb would have been noteworthy in the 1990's, but nowadays where 100mbit are the norm and webspace is counted in giga- and terabytes, it seems a bit overly restrictive.

Delete your cookies.

The larger the uploaded file size is, the more visible is the quality loss in the 138x138 avatar...

Link to comment

Alright let me rephrase that:

 

This is not a tech support thread. I am asking about a tiny change to the forum servers, which would be a visible QoL increase for everyone.

Of course not. However, the increase in max upload kb size you're asking for is just one factor of several that influence the final quality of an avatar in 138x138, for example the max pixel size, the compression level used for the to be uploaded image, the high compression of the board software and the overall quality of the original image used, in your case a FO4 in-game shot. Actually it's the infamous butterfly effect you are dealing with. In any case you might ask the administration for a change in your direction. The fact that those who use a shapeless stickman /w just a handful colors don't see what the blurring problem is shouldn't bother you much.

 

Besides, the uploader is probably the only one that cares... :P

Link to comment

 

Alright let me rephrase that:

 

This is not a tech support thread. I am asking about a tiny change to the forum servers, which would be a visible QoL increase for everyone.

Of course not. However, the increase in max upload kb size you're asking for is just one factor of several that influence the final quality of an avatar in 138x138, for example the max pixel size, the compression level used for the to be uploaded image, the high compression of the board software and the overall quality of the original image used, in your case a FO4 in-game shot. Actually it's the infamous butterfly effect you are dealing with. In any case you might ask the administration for a change in your direction. The fact that those who use a shapeless stickman /w just a handful colors don't see what the blurring problem is shouldn't bother you much.

 

Besides, the uploader is probably the only one that cares... :P

 

Well yes, that's why i made this thread.

 

If the max filesize was larger, we could use a PNG in higher resolution which would display without distortions when getting downscaled. Ideally it would have to be at least twice the resolution of the largest visible pic in the profile.

 

And the other question is, why does the image still get compressed further when you already are asked about a VERY tiny filesize to begin with. So optimizing the picture doesn't really help as you have noticed, except for people like Grine who use a posterized image with 5 colors.

 

Anyways your attempts to help are appreciated, yet none of the replies here have contributed anything to the question wether the concerning software should be modernized to 2017 standards or not.

For example, if anyone would do the math and state that the amount of webspace taken up by a hundred thousand uncompressed 100-200kb avatars would be too expensive, that would be acceptable.

Link to comment

...

Anyways your attempts to help are appreciated, yet none of the replies here have contributed anything to the question wether the concerning software should be modernized to 2017 standards or not.

...

Doubt that the board software used is not up to date. Main problem, as you might have figured out already, is the internal high compression rate, far above the max compression rate in Gimp. Dunno if that's adjustable at all.

Link to comment

Doubt that the board software used is not up to date. Main problem, as you might have figured out already, is the high compression rate, far above the max compression rate in Gimp.

I was under the impression that LL uses the same (or very similar version of the) software like Nexus does for it's forum section. Yet on the Nexus with a slightly larger filesize limit, it seems like the 200x200 PNGs in the forum profile page are displayed lossless.

 

Of course people using a "smart" phone to browse won't care, just like people with 50$ monitors ;-)

I'm on a very decent and perfectly calibrated 27" 1080p monitor myself, so i developed a bit of an obsession about image quality. Jaggies from poor AA or bad DoF settings can be annoying, but as long as each pixel is in the right place it's usually acceptable (like in the pic posted on top). Too high image compression messes everything up though.

Link to comment

 

Doubt that the board software used is not up to date. Main problem, as you might have figured out already, is the high compression rate, far above the max compression rate in Gimp.

I was under the impression that LL uses the same (or very similar version of the) software like Nexus does for it's forum section. Yet on the Nexus with a slightly larger filesize limit, it seems like the 200x200 PNGs in the forum profile page are displayed lossless.

...

 

Hmm. On the Nexus my 200x200px image gets reduced from 60kb to 40 kb in 140x140px. Maybe the software on the Nexus uses a different (i.e. better) img compressor with a similar compression rate as the one on LL. Methinks /w 'maybe' I've reached the end of the line and pure speculation begins. You should really talk to those in charge on LL. We simply lack the access to the program.
Link to comment

 

 

Alright let me rephrase that:

 

This is not a tech support thread. I am asking about a tiny change to the forum servers, which would be a visible QoL increase for everyone.

 

this you should best to ask @Ashal 

 

 

Every time I see Winny's avatar I think of the Vilja mod from Skyrim. :P

 

 

HaHa, but it is not, look once how great this avatar is in the origin.  ;)

click on it and then again  :lol:

 

http://celebritiesporngallery.cdnheros.com/image2/cauo38ptk4.jpg

Link to comment

Yes, the requirements are ancient. Its 2k17, soon 18 and we are still limited to 50kb.. wtf. The 56k times are long time gone you know. 

 

this site is also ancient they have already tried twice LL to modernize, but every time it was a failure. 

Why don't you people help out then, and pay for a additional server?

 

It may sound like increasing the allowed limit size, is a piss in the wind, but use your brains.

There are 100's if not 1000's members here, and if increasing the limit size, would in the end, take up so much more space and would result in extra costs.

 

for this reason animated avatars are also forbidden.  ;)

Link to comment

Why don't you people help out then, and pay for a additional server?

 

It may sound like increasing the allowed limit size, is a piss in the wind, but use your brains.

There are 100's if not 1000's members here, and if increasing the limit size, would in the end, take up so much more space and would result in extra costs.

 

Limit the avatar option for external links only, no uploading to the LL server.

Link to comment
  • 1 year later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. For more information, see our Privacy Policy & Terms of Use