Signature Sizes

[El_Jefe]

As I've written quite a few PMs recently regarding this subject, just thought I'd give a friendly reminder to people about the signature sizes.


Signatures will be restricted in size and content. Signatures may not excede a 495x150 pixel area, this includes all images and text used. The total file size for all images contained in a signature may not excede 100,000 bytes. Signatures that do not comply may be removed or edited by a moderator or administator.

You can find the full explaination of the policy, here. (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showtopic=22529)

There will be a 24 hour period for all members that wish to resize or edit their signatures in any way, after that your signature may be removed if it does not comply with the board's policy.

[Livy]

just to clear something up myself. if someones sig had a 495x150 image, and text below that would be breaking th rules?

[El_Jefe]

Well, when I go through, I'll pretty much only concern myself with the image sizes, unless there is an excessive amount of text. Basically, the signature should look like a signature. If it looks like somebody has his notes for writing the great american novel in his signature as well as an image over the limit, I'll probably be inclined to remove it, though.

[Benno]

Yep. The whole sig has to fit into a 495x150 pixel area.

[Gre1]

I will have to do one I don't even have one yet.

[sabbath]

Well I know mine is a bit off, I'll do it tonight ;)

Edit: OK [B][O][T], I'll do it now...

[Amarjit]

Mines 320 x 100 therefore I still have a 130px drop remaining. :P

[Illuminati]

To help those who cannot understand what the hell mods are saying (how else can you explain the few who can&#39;t follow the rules? <_<)


There will be a 24 hour period for all members that wish to resize or edit their signatures in any way

Read "signature amnesty"


after that your signature may be removed if it does not comply with the board&#39;s policy.

Read "if you don&#39;t do it in that time, your sig will be removed without your will. Bitch about it and you WILL become a mod&#39;s bitch."

You have been warned ;)

[MUSLEMAN]

i&#39;ve modified mine to meet the standards also :lol:

[El_Jefe]

---Bump---

About 19 hours and counting. :)

[Livy]

im guessing mines within the limit. also what about avatars? are u enforcing them too?

[El_Jefe]

Please check that the size of your avatar image and your signature images are under 100 KB ( Together ) &#33;

Why ?

- speed
- readability
- we also have 56K/ ISDN Users


Guess so. ;)

Awful lot of questions for someone who doesn&#39;t have anything to worry about....barely, by the thinnest of margins. :lol:

[3rd gen noob]

my sig is a little bit over in terms of vertical pixel size
the reason i don&#39;t remove it is that the site on which the image is hosted (my own site from my last isp) is no longer under my control

i have to wait approximately 24 hours until my new site is up with my new isp and i don&#39;t know if they allow hotlinking
if they do not, i shall remove the text
if they do, i shall put up a smaller pic

p.s. i don&#39;t want to use an image host due to the uncertainty of down time and registering hastles

p.p.s. if you wish, i can remove my sig temporarily

[El_Jefe]

Well, when I go through, I&#39;ll pretty much only concern myself with the image sizes, unless there is an excessive amount of text. Basically, the signature should look like a signature. If it looks like somebody has his notes for writing the great american novel in his signature as well as an image over the limit, I&#39;ll probably be inclined to remove it, though.
@3rd gen noob
You&#39;re fine.

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by El_Jefe@10 September 2003 - 23:18
@3rd gen noob
You&#39;re fine.
ok, thanks :D
i still feel al little hypocritical at the moment, however, i hope to rectify the problem soon

[Livy]

your sig is only a little over which doesnt matter that much, where as if it was 400 then thats dif, also if ur only over by 0.5k is alot dif than 50k, there has to be a little leway in the rules.

edit: also if its 100k, and not 100,000 bytes then i have 2.8k to play with . :)

[tantric]

No offense livy, but why do think there has to be leeway in the rules? It&#39;s not as if the guidelines are so minimal that it&#39;s nearly impossible to comply. 100K is very generous, why should anyone feel a need to exceed it, even if by "only" a few bytes? An image can be a wee bit under just as easily as a wee bit over.

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by AfterBurn@11 September 2003 - 01:30
An image can be a wee bit under just as easily as a wee bit over.
if it&#39;s under, it&#39;s under

[tantric]

And if it&#39;s over, it&#39;s over. Or is it not over till the fat lady sings?

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by AfterBurn@11 September 2003 - 01:50
And if it&#39;s over, it&#39;s over. Or is it not over till the fat lady sings?
absolutely

[3rd gen noob]

ok, my sig is now easily under the limits...
got the new site up and thankfully, it supports hotlinking :)

[Rip The Jacker]

Finally someone brings this up. I see a LOT of members who have been members for a long time, and still don&#39;t follow the rules. And I&#39;ve asked quite a few members to resize their sigs, but they just ignore me. If we have to follow the rules, then so should everyone else.

[Livy]

http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showuser=10253

thsi guys takign the piss, its about 450k i think, and over in size rules

[asmithz]

Thats what n00bz do, breck the rulez.

[El_Jefe]

5 hours and counting

[Dapadipz]

was my sig illegal? its gone :(

[RealitY]

Well I just got online and noticed my Sig had the picture removed.
I was actually joking with Shadow and 3rd about it last night HERE (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showtopic=66061).

I know the heigt was a little off, but the bytes were well within rage anyway, thought that was a kinda ok thing. Well I brought the height on the picture down to 150 from 178, so it shoulld be just fine now.

I would like to know is who was the culprit that did this without even sending me a PM.

So in short...
STEP OURSIDE.

[El_Jefe]

Originally posted by REALITY@12 September 2003 - 01:03
I would like to know is who was the culprit that did this without even sending me a PM.


That would be me. Wanna make something of it? :lol:

[RealitY]

Originally posted by El_Jefe+12 September 2003 - 07:07--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (El_Jefe @ 12 September 2003 - 07:07)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-REALITY@12 September 2003 - 01:03
I would like to know is who was the culprit that did this without even sending me a PM.


That would be me. Wanna make something of it? :lol: [/b][/quote]
Yes...
Lets Go...

Is It To Your Approval Now O Wise Sig Destroyer...

[tantric]

Originally posted by REALITY@12 September 2003 - 00:03
Well I brought the height on the picture down to 150 from 178, so it shoulld be just fine now.
Isn&#39;t the 150 pixel restriction supposed to include the text portion as well as the images?

[RealitY]

Originally posted by AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 08:56
Isn&#39;t the 150 pixel restriction supposed to include the text portion as well as the images?
Don&#39;t bust my balls please...
Beside putting that text to the side would lOOk like carp...

[tantric]

I want nothing to do with your gonads, I only asked a question. And so far as moving the text to the side, I don&#39;t see why it would make it appear fishlike.

[RealitY]

Originally posted by AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 09:10
I don&#39;t see why it would make it appear fishlike.
1. It would be all on one line
2. I have taste and classssssss
3. Simply because I said sooooooo
:P :P :P :P

[RealitY]

Originally posted by AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 09:10
I don&#39;t see why it would make it appear fishlike.
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-9/379469/ElmurrFudd.jpg (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showtopic=56114&st=90&#entry489678)Click On Elmur Fudd If In The US (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/bb/index.php?showtopic=56114)***** ORRRR KAKABOOM ***** (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/bb/index.php?showtopic=56114)To truly <span style='color:red'>GIVE is to expect nothing in return.</span>

Does That Look Good To You????
I rest my case.

[tantric]

I still don&#39;t get the fish analogy, but does this look bad?

http://members.roadfly.com/4ab/Elmer.gif (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showtopic=56114&st=90&#entry489678)
Click On Elmer Fudd If In The US (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/bb/index.php?showtopic=56114)
***** ORRRR KAKABOOM ***** (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/bb/index.php?showtopic=56114)
To truly GIVE is to expect nothing in return.


Or you could go full-blown with something more like this.

http://members.roadfly.com/4ab/FullSig.gif (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showtopic=56114&st=90&#entry489678)

[RealitY]

I Like...
May I if you don&#39;t mind...

[tantric]

Then go ahead and save it, host it, use it&#33; Glad I could be of help.

[RealitY]

Considering the effort,
Personally I just don&#39;t take the time on this lately...

I&#39;ll tweak the fonts and stuff later...
Also I need a new host, the image breakdown sucks.

[tantric]

Why did you convert it from GIF to JPG? That&#39;s the reason the image degraded.

[RealitY]

Originally posted by AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 12:09
Why did you convert it from GIF to JPG? That&#39;s the reason the image degraded.
Done...

[tantric]

Looks better. So why did you convert it to begin with, if you don&#39;t mind me asking?

[RealitY]

Originally posted by AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 12:17
Looks better. So why did you convert it to begin with, if you don&#39;t mind me asking?
Opened in Picture It and saved in jpeg by goof...

[tantric]

Odd, I didn&#39;t think Picture It usually smeared things that much. But as a GIF, the background is transparent as well, so it looks better when the post color changes.

[RealitY]

Originally posted by AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 12:27
Odd, I didn&#39;t think Picture It usually smeared things that much. But as a GIF, the background is transparent as well, so it looks better when the post color changes.
I think some of the smear comes from Village Photos having some sort of jpeg optimizer.

[tantric]

Must be the case, because out of curiosity I just ran it through Picture It and it didn&#39;t look too bad. The file size increased about 15% though.

[Snee]

Originally posted by REALITY+12 September 2003 - 12:29--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (REALITY @ 12 September 2003 - 12:29)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 12:27
Odd, I didn&#39;t think Picture It usually smeared things that much.&nbsp; But as a GIF, the background is transparent as well, so it looks better when the post color changes.
I think some of the smear comes from Village Photos having some sort of jpeg optimizer. [/b][/quote]
No, here&#39;s the deal, it&#39;s not an optimizer it&#39;s a compression tool, and you can turn it off.

[Somebody1234]

Originally posted by AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 02:56
Isn&#39;t the 150 pixel restriction supposed to include the text portion as well as the images?
Excellent question.

Signatures will be restricted in size and content. Signatures may not excede a 495x150 pixel area, this includes all images and text used. The total file size for all images contained in a signature may not excede 100,000 bytes. Signatures that do not comply may be removed or edited by a moderator or administator.

[RealitY]

Originally posted by SnnY+12 September 2003 - 12:58--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SnnY @ 12 September 2003 - 12:58)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by REALITY@12 September 2003 - 12:29
<!--QuoteBegin-AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 12:27
Odd, I didn&#39;t think Picture It usually smeared things that much. But as a GIF, the background is transparent as well, so it looks better when the post color changes.
I think some of the smear comes from Village Photos having some sort of jpeg optimizer.
No, here&#39;s the deal, it&#39;s not an optimizer it&#39;s a compression tool, and you can turn it off. [/b][/quote]
Hmmmm...
Thats what I meant, anyway enough said.

[Rip The Jacker]

Signatures will be restricted in size and content. Signatures may not excede a 495x150 pixel area, this includes all images and text used. The total file size for all images contained in a signature may not excede 100,000 bytes. Signatures that do not comply may be removed or edited by a moderator or administator.
How are we supposed to know how many pixels the text takes up? Is my sig too big then?

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by KrackHead2k@14 September 2003 - 05:34
How are we supposed to know how many pixels the text takes up? Is my sig too big then?
only by a couple of pixels, but i&#39;m sure the mods don&#39;t mind a few pixels...

[RealitY]

Right Click And Select Properties...

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by REALITY@14 September 2003 - 05:36
Right Click And Select Properties...
properties won&#39;t include the text though, unless the text is part of the image...

[tantric]

I believe standard text on this forum will be about 12 pixels high, including the space from the text or image above.

[RealitY]

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+14 September 2003 - 06:38--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob &#064; 14 September 2003 - 06:38)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-REALITY@14 September 2003 - 05:36
Right Click And Select Properties...
properties won&#39;t include the text though, unless the text is part of the image... [/b][/quote]
True, although KH, who asked, didn&#39;t have much...

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by REALITY@14 September 2003 - 07:42
True, although KH, who asked, didn&#39;t have much...
yeah, i don&#39;t think the mods would ban him for it...:P

also, i think the pics above make up for the &#39;law-breaking&#39; sig :rolleyes:

[El_Jefe]

--bump--

Read first post and look at date for any questions about mysteriously disappearing sigs.