Just a suggestion

[Guest promodmerc]

This is just my opinion so lets not start a war.

I feel the size of pics in signatures is getting out of hand. Some of them now darn near take up my entire screen and it jumbles up threads like crazy. It's even worse when someone quotes a post with one of these jumbo size signature pics.

What do others think?

Lets be civil about this so Harry doesn't have to lock this.

[Harry P.]

I'd prefer no pictures in the sigs at all. We already have an avatar, that's enough "personality" for everyone. I agree that some of the members are getting a little carried away.

[Bernard Kron]

I agree that signature pics are getting out of hand. But I do like putting a picture in my signature; this area allows a little more freedom than the avatar. Having said that, the issue is vertical height more than width. I have had to really wrestle to make it any kind of acceptable vertical height at all. My current one is 150 pixels high, the same as the max for the avatar, but I almost think 100 might be a better max for signatures. Width is a different matter altogether and you can easily go 300+ pixels, but the result is a very odd shaped image. The bottom line is that standard sized images from your camera of computer screen won't work. I would miss not including an image in signatures but Harry might be right if folks don't have the editing software and/or chops to make it work.

Edited December 1, 2009 by gbk1

[Jon Cole]

I try to make sure my sig pic isn't too big, and I admit I don't know how to size down a photo. I use Fotki. Can anyone help me? I like adding those photos, and change them frequently. This helps in sharing the way I am. This internet is already to sheltering and impersonal, a photo can help break the ice, so to speak.

Don't worry about animated gifs... don't know how to find much less use those!

[Zoom Zoom]

The smaller the signature picture, the better IMHO, and I think most of them are just fine. A few were really out of hand with photos so huge they were forcing posts to get so wide you'd have to scroll back & forth, and/or they had obnoxious gifs/animations that were completely distracting if not completely inappropriate (I say in the past tense because the culprits w/the obnoxious signature photos got shoved onto my "ignored users" list).

[Bernard Kron]

I try to make sure my sig pic isn't too big, and I admit I don't know how to size down a photo. I use Fotki. Can anyone help me? I like adding those photos, and change them frequently. This helps in sharing the way I am. This internet is already to sheltering and impersonal, a photo can help break the ice, so to speak....

Your current "sig pic" is 600x480. Unfortunately sizing it down to say 160 height would lead to a width of only 200 and some small type on the text. I think the signature area demands a wide and skinny shaped image to avoid hogging too much vertical space between messages. I use Photobucket and their software allows you to resize the image. However they don't include a cropping ability which is key to creating a signature friendly image. I'm not a Fotki user so I don't know whether they provide photo editing functions.

I use Photoshop to crop and size all my images for posting. Maximum width for main post pictures is 800 pixels which is friendly to older, smaller monitors and screens. And I "worry" about things like avatar friendly images and, as discussed here, signature images. Photoshop is quite expensive software however. Perhaps someone can recommend freeware or inexpensive shareware that will achieve the same thing.

But the bottom line is unless you have the inclination and ability to crop and resize images things like avatar and signature pictures can be quite problematical. The MCM board software automatically resizes your avatar for you. This is really great. But the method by which you insert a picture into your signature doesn't have this ability. If it did I would enforce a maximum height of 200 pixels at the very most, and even less IMHO.

[george 53]

I Gotta agree. A pic thats 7 inches tall and a reply that's a 1/2 inch tall that goes with it is just (insert thought here)!

Those wierd Tony Montana"scarface" pics are just as(insert thought again)! The little bug things runnin around made me keep wipein the screen for pete's sake. Just TOO distracting! Don't blame Bob for ignorein them at all. wat's wrong with just postin? Just caz ya CAN do it, don't neccesarily mean ya SHOULD!

[Jon Cole]

Thanks Harry, for re-sizing my sig photo down, although I never really thought it was a problem to begin with.

The bigger picture here is (Ohh! A pun!) are we going to start nit-picking every da#n thing in these posts of ours? Jeez, in the short time I have been here, I have seen so much... trivial complaints brought up. Why? Are we running out of worthwhile topics to discuss?

What will the next "gripe" be? Font size? Maybe a "cartoon" in the avatar? (Bust me now! Ship me off to the Big House! Guilty as charged! )

It's a little weird here sometimes, but I still say this is the best board on model cars!

[Harry P.]

The thing is, we're a big group of very different people who are all crowded into the same room, trying to get along, so there are going to constantly be things that come up. Something bugs this guy, another thing bugs that guy, and so on. It's inevitable and it's not ever going to end as long as we keep things pretty loose around here... which is the way I think most of you like it.

The only way to cut down on the disagreements is to have so many rules in place, and run this place so strictly, that most things we might disagree on are eliminated before they ever become an issue. But do we really want that kind of forum here?

Isn't the fact that this place is more "member friendly" than some other forums the very reason a lot of you are here in the first place?

If the "cost" of keeping this place open and fairly free is a minor disagreement now and then, I say it's well worth it.

[Guest promodmerc]

The thing is, we're a big group of very different people who are all crowded into the same room, trying to get along, so there are going to constantly be things that come up. Something bugs this guy, another thing bugs that guy, and so on. It's inevitable and it's not ever going to end as long as we keep things pretty loose around here... which is the way I think most of you like it.

The only way to cut down on the disagreements is to have so many rules in place, and run this place so strictly, that most things we might disagree on are eliminated before they ever become an issue. But do we really want that kind of forum here?

Isn't the fact that this place is more "member friendly" than some other forums the very reason a lot of you are here in the first place?

If the "cost" of keeping this place open and fairly free is a minor disagreement now and then, I say it's well worth it.

Exactly!

That other so called "model forum" doesn't even allow an avatar. They don't even allow the Rebel flag to be posted on the General Lee. Harry could just as easily said no pics in signatures period but he didn't.

Edited December 1, 2009 by promodmerc

[Jon Cole]

"Isn't the fact that this place is more "member friendly" than some other forums the very reason a lot of you are here in the first place?"

Indeed it is! It is the best!

[Jon Cole]

"That other so called "model forum" doesn't even allow an avatar. They don't even allow the Rebel flag to be posted on the General Lee. Harry could just as easily said no pics in signatures period but he didn't."

Wow. That is absurd! I never been to that forum. I didn't know the Taliban had a model car web site

[Bernard Kron]

Thanks Harry, for re-sizing my sig photo down, although I never really thought it was a problem to begin with....

Hey Jon! That sig pic is still plenty big to read and actually looks better on the page resized down. It's "only" 246 pixels tall now so I don't have to scroll down the page to read the text. It looks like Harry cropped out some of the black so the picture and text aren't that much smaller. But that's what I mean about having the tools and inclination to do that sort of thing...

[george 53]

But ya mean, Lombo's DON'T come wif Doo's no mo????? Fa da price ya gotta pays fo dem, dey BETTA put me some doo's on at mutha!!!!! ( have i EVER mentioned, I LOVE this place?)

[Guest Gramps-xrds]

Your current "sig pic" is 600x480. Unfortunately sizing it down to say 160 height would lead to a width of only 200 and some small type on the text. I think the signature area demands a wide and skinny shaped image to avoid hogging too much vertical space between messages. I use Photobucket and their software allows you to resize the image. However they don't include a cropping ability which is key to creating a signature friendly image. I'm not a Fotki user so I don't know whether they provide photo editing functions.

Yes Photobucket does have a crop function. And it's very easy to use. To save it you need to go full screen and either save or replace the original.

[Eshaver]

I dunno how to do any of this nonsense so I guess that leaves more room for everyone else . Ed Shaver

[Guest Gramps-xrds]

I dunno how to do any of this nonsense so I guess that leaves more room for everyone else . Ed Shaver

It's not hard Ed. I just don't see any need to do it.

[Bernard Kron]

Yes Photobucket does have a crop function. And it's very easy to use. To save it you need to go full screen and either save or replace the original.

Thanx! I guess I was too lazy to go and check... I just tried it and the only downside I can see at all is that once you crop the image you can't make it any bigger, just smaller, when you resize. Can anyone clarify if Fotki has such tools? Fotki is extremely popular in the car modeling community.

Edited December 1, 2009 by gbk1

[roadhawg]

The little bug things runnin around made me keep wipein the screen for pete's sake.....

At least ya had a clean screen.......I can't believe you didn't like my bug! (Stomps off in disgust!)

[Bernard Kron]

At least ya had a clean screen.......I can't believe you didn't like my bug! (Stomps off in disgust!)

Personally I loved your little bug, but I hafta admit it did drive me buggy...

Edited December 1, 2009 by gbk1

[Guest Gramps-xrds]

Thanx! I guess I was too lazy to go and check... Can anyone clarify if Fotki has such tools? Fotki is extremely popular in the car modeling community.

In my opinion, if you're using Photobucket. Stay with it. To me it's a lot easier to use and post pix with. I've tried Fotki and didn't like it. Another problem w/ Fotki is when you're browsing someones link to it, When you enlarge anything to view, when you return it takes you back to the top of the page and if there's a lot of pix you have to sort through everything to find where you were. So for that reason when someone links to Fotki I don't bother looking at anything there.

[Jon Cole]

In my opinion, if you're using Photobucket. Stay with it. To me it's a lot easier to use and post pix with. I've tried Fotki and didn't like it. Another problem w/ Fotki is when you're browsing someones link to it, When you enlarge anything to view, when you return it takes you back to the top of the page and if there's a lot of pix you have to sort through everything to find where you were. So for that reason when someone links to Fotki I don't bother looking at anything there.

Bill,

Not sure if I understand. When I hit the "return" arrow after I view a photo on Fotki, it takes me back to the page the photo is on. My pages ar set to show a maximum of 48 photos per page, and I see the thumbnail for that photo without touching the mouse.

[RyanSilva]

I use a add-on in mozilla firefox called ad block plus. Whenever I don't like seeing pictures like those huge model of the month winners or sig pictures, I just right click the photo and block it, and I never see it again.

[Guest Gramps-xrds]

Bill,

Not sure if I understand. When I hit the "return" arrow after I view a photo on Fotki, it takes me back to the page the photo is on. My pages ar set to show a maximum of 48 photos per page, and I see the thumbnail for that photo without touching the mouse.

[Harry P.]

Photobucket, people!