Sig Size Discussion, input for guidelines - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

flip · 03-07-2009, 07:28 PM

Just curious what the rules are for this?

I see some users have MOD EDIT: Sorry but this image is a little too huge for a sig (or something to that effect).

Yet then I see users with sigs like this:

Locke

Orange

and CMPunk

I don't mean to pick on you three specifically but given how friggin huge those sigs are I don't know how anyone could have an image too big for a sig.

I know this has come up before and the answer tends to be "well just turn off sigs" but I like to see other peoples sigs (and mine is cool too so I want to see it). So it would be nice to see clear guidelines on how much space they can take up. It seems it has really been getting out of control the last few months.

It isn't even the image sizes, except in Orange's sig, it is the sheer depth of the sigs. They are literaly 5 times as big as a one sentence post.

Is there any way that mods can be just a little more vigilant in making sure these things are managable? I'd hate to have to turn them off and like I said sigs seem to be getting bigger and bigger and bigger over the last 6 months or so.

Do any other users go crazy because of this? A poll maybe to determine if there should be a limit, with examples of say 3 or 4 different sizes that could be limits.

Thanks.

photon · 03-07-2009, 07:50 PM

Well there is some wording in the rules:

Quote:

Signatures must be no larger than 400px wide by 150px tall. Some extra text is ok, but try to keep it about that high.

So for those who have that in their sigs, it's usually because the image itself is too big dimension wise, or is an animated GIF that's megabytes big.

I do agree with you, some of them are big.. it's hard to come up with a good rule though if you mix text and an image.

CMPunk's the image is fine dimension wise, maybe a bit big file size wise but I like Harry Potter..

Orange's is too big for sure, and Locke's images comply but there's 2 of them vertically plus some text, so probably too big.

What would be a good rule? The 400x150 image plus what, 4 or 5 lines of text max?

flip · 03-07-2009, 08:01 PM

Here's a few that seem to be able to do it right. Good mix of text (preferably in the smallest font) and image:

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...0&postcount=38

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...5&postcount=11

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...8&postcount=53

As you can see they have limited the depth of the image size in most of them and managed to put in text that doesn't have a full empty line in between so as to have so much white space in the sig.

This one

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...90&postcount=5

is pretty boarderline. Not sure how big that is to the original 3 I posted but if the image was just a tad smaller I think it would be ok.

photon · 03-07-2009, 08:04 PM

That last one is 150px high, which is the limit according to the rules.

I guess what I'm getting after is we need a set of guidelines which is explicit and easy to enforce and comply with, so I'm soliciting suggestions.

HOOT · 03-08-2009, 12:22 AM

Better?

flip · 03-08-2009, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HOOT

Better?

Haha. I didn't mean to put pressure on people. Just a little cluttered looking IMO. As long as your sig is within site rules go ahead. Don't anyone go changing on account of me, but thanks it does look better. Although considering your sig you may prefer it that way.

That is maybe even a little small compared to mine even. It would be nice to see a slight reduction though in some cases, with more and more of them popping up the discussion seems to get lost in the sigs.

HOOT · 03-08-2009, 12:30 PM

I am with you on this one, trust me I didn't pick this signature

CP should look into making a rule on how big your total signature can be, text and images, together. Some are WAY too big and your right it does clutter things up.

I'd say 100xwhatever with 2-3 lines of text or 150xwhatever and no text.

I know some people will say just turn off the signatures and shut up but I truly do like the signatures of most and it is a great way to identify posters right away for the most part.

Either way doesn't matter to me, it just gave me an excuses to make that ugly thing a bit smaller

photon · 03-08-2009, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HOOT

CP should look into making a rule on how big your total signature can be, text and images, together. Some are WAY too big and your right it does clutter things up.

I'd say 100xwhatever with 2-3 lines of text or 150xwhatever and no text.

Heh, that's what I'm looking for in this thread, some feedback as to what such a rule should look like. Thanks! Anyone else?

rbochan · 03-09-2009, 06:53 AM

Honestly, those are nothing. Check out some over on the Leafs boards sometime. Some of those are pretty ridiculous.

Gozer · 03-09-2009, 09:27 AM

I can't stand signatures. Always off on any forum I visit.

4X4 · 03-09-2009, 12:40 PM

Some people obviously enjoy making them and sporting them. I am not one of those people. I hate images in sigs.

HOOT · 03-10-2009, 09:10 PM

this one is pretty big too

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...13&postcount=2

Temporary_User · 03-11-2009, 06:40 AM

While I like Jayems sig, I find it distracting.
Could we possibly ban sigs/avatars with motion in them?

Boblobla · 03-11-2009, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Temporary_User

While I like Jayems sig, I find it distracting.
Could we possibly ban sigs/avatars with motion in them?

I find animated gif for avatars and sigs very entertaining. As long as they are within the image size limitations I don't think a ban is warranted.

4X4 · 03-11-2009, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Temporary_User

While I like Jayems sig, I find it distracting.
Could we possibly ban sigs/avatars with motion in them?

The worst is Canada02's exploding one. I really wanted to read his posts in the embryonic stem cells thread but that goddamn sig was too distracting.

Dion · 03-11-2009, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boblobla

I find animated gif for avatars and sigs very entertaining. As long as they are within the image size limitations I don't think a ban is warranted.

I like them also.

Boblobla · 03-11-2009, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dion

I like them also.

We might be slightly biased though

HOOT · 03-11-2009, 04:13 PM

Avatars I don't mind so much because they are so small (50x50) and off to the side, it's the signatures that get in the way IMO

FurnaceFace · 03-11-2009, 07:16 PM

Boblobla's animated I can easily ignore, photons is easy to ignore - and is funny...and I suspect most can easily ignore mine too. I very much dislike the video capture loop ones like Jayems current sig or whoever has the dude lighting his pants on fire. Something about those is far more distracting than the true animated ones, I think it's because they don't flow well where subtle movements which loop well work. Tough one to mod I'm sure.

I would agree on a total pixel limit size for sigs. 3 lines of text plus the current image size would do it.

Oh, and for Orange's sig, I can fix that. He's using an image off my site so I'll just resize it to under 150px.

photon · 03-11-2009, 08:09 PM

This would be a good sig!

I was going to embed this but thought better of it.

http://latrola.net/blok/mejorgif/ima...9384479547.gif

Yeah I like to keep my animated avatars fairly subtle, not too much movement, even this one is a bit much but it's dark so it's ok.

Animated sigs, I guess I like them, I'm able to skip over them when I need to. The kowala one is actually too big but I left it for a few days because I liked it.