Big Signuature?

Cheri said:
She was asking what size she could be able to use for her signature. :)
Click to expand...

AD upload system is limited to 19.9 KB but Alex allowed us to use signature at 50 KB or less, that means AD upload system isn't enough then I was posted the link about photo hosting to able to upload the pic that's larger than 19.9 KB.

I had using imageshack for years for uploaded some of my picture.

I was posted the link to help Mann to upload her picture that's larger than 19.9 KB.
 
Ooh thank you pacman! I'll think about it.

I'm wonder, what's about phtobucket.com ? I have one.
 
Mann_K05 said:
Ooh thank you pacman! I'll think about it.

I'm wonder, what's about phtobucket.com ? I have one.
Click to expand...

Also, need let you know about Photobucket.

Photobucket can be across to public when some members found your link via source or info then across to look at your album, I think that found about last several month ago. If you upload on imageshack then means your photo would be alone, no album contained and no one would across to see photo as you wish not want shared with everyone.
 
Photobucket is great too, I'm member of Photobucket.
Click to expand...

Ok, good! That would be so easy for me.

Pacman said:
Also, need let you know about Photobucket.

Photobucket can be across to public when some members found your link via source or info then across to look at your album, I think that found about last several month ago. If you upload on imageshack then means your photo would be alone, no album contained and no one would across to see photo as you wish not want shared with everyone.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, I aware of that. I locked my account user as prative only. Whenever I have a time to make more signatures. Again, thank you for your BIG help, I may need it! :)
 
:bump: for the question.

What is a limit for VIP member's signature? Same 100 x 500 size? Or else?

I'd been searched for the answer in this section, Alex's thread, and a few other threads...
 
Question. Why is there a limit on the size of a signature? Is it so big signatures don't fill up so much of a page? Because signatures are linked to an external server (at least mine is), so it shouldn't be using any of AD's server space, correct?
 
No, not what I mean. I just want to know what size for the signature for VIP members can allow.

Like, for an example - 100 x 500 for regular members, and 200x1,000 for VIP members.

Y'know?
 
AlleyCat said:
Question. Why is there a limit on the size of a signature? Is it so big signatures don't fill up so much of a page? Because signatures are linked to an external server (at least mine is), so it shouldn't be using any of AD's server space, correct?
Click to expand...
Some images are also from our own server.

It's not a matter of using bandwidth. It's a matter of what other members see.

A typical post is at least 800 pixels high and leaves an average space of between 80 and 100 pixels high. By making the signature image bigger than 800, it forces the page to load at a wider view and members may have to scroll sideways just to view a thread or post.

Having a signature that's higher than 100 pixels will force members to scroll down more just to read your posts.

That is why it's recommended that signature images are no bigger than 500 pixels wide and 100 pixels high.
 
VamPyroX said:
Some images are also from our own server.

It's not a matter of using bandwidth. It's a matter of what other members see.

A typical post is at least 800 pixels high and leaves an average space of between 80 and 100 pixels high. By making the signature image bigger than 800, it forces the page to load at a wider view and members may have to scroll sideways just to view a thread or post.

Having a signature that's higher than 100 pixels will force members to scroll down more just to read your posts.

That is why it's recommended that signature images are no bigger than 500 pixels wide and 100 pixels high.
Click to expand...

Bandwidth do not matter? You are not make any sense.

Bandwidth is a measure of available or consumed data communication resources expressed in bit/s or multiples of it (

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwidth_(computing)


http://www.alldeaf.com/announcements/43761-help-keep-alldeaf-free-making-donation.html

However, due to the high costs of maintaining the site (web space, bandwidth, software upgrades), I'm asking for your support by making a donation to help pay for the monthly server fees and keep AllDeaf free to everyone. Donate any amount that you can, whether it's $5, $10, $50, etc. Any amount would help a lot, really.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, Alex said bandwidth do matter.
 
Last edited:
Hmm... I guess I will go ahead make less than 100x500 stamps by then.

By the way, thanks for the help, Highlander and Vampy. :)
 
The Highlander said:
Bandwidth do not matter? You are not make any sense.

Bandwidth is a measure of available or consumed data communication resources expressed in bit/s or multiples of it (

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwidth_(computing)


http://www.alldeaf.com/announcements/43761-help-keep-alldeaf-free-making-donation.html



Oh yes, Alex said bandwidth do matter.
Click to expand...
I said two things in response to her comment.

She mentioned that images were linked from another server (other domains and not AllDeaf's). So, bandwidth shouldn't be an issue.

I replied with...
Some images are also from our own server.
Click to expand...
Some images we see in signatures are from AllDeaf's server. So, we are using AllDeaf's bandwidth. I know about that.

I then said...
It's not a matter of using bandwidth. It's a matter of what other members see.
Click to expand...
I was pointing out that the concern for big signatures is not because of bandwidth, but because of what members see. Having too big of a signature image can be a problem for other members when they have to scroll sideways or scroll up/down more just to read through a page.
 
Yah, I know what Vamp's referring to. Bandwidth and "forum courtesy" are two different issues.

Common forum etiquette prefers it so that your signature isn't larger than what you type on a general 1 paragraph post (like 1-2 inches height). No one really bothers to go around measuring your sig sizes unless it starts annoying them or others.

100x500 is a nice figure, but I can imagine something like 50x600 working okay, due to the fact that 1024x768 is making the standard today (non mobile wise).

As long as it doesn't cause others to have to scroll then you are fine.

Whenever I try to do signatures, I try to keep the readers as the priority, not my own.
Huge sigs by using very long or detailed animated gifs are another issue, and that's the bandwidth problem. I think as long as the size is within ~70kb or less then that's the accepted standard.

BTW, as per VIP allocations Karissa, it is said that you are allowed two pics a sig. Regular members only 1.
 
naisho said:
Yah, I know what Vamp's referring to. Bandwidth and "forum courtesy" are two different issues.

Common forum etiquette prefers it so that your signature isn't larger than what you type on a general 1 paragraph post (like 1-2 inches height). No one really bothers to go around measuring your sig sizes unless it starts annoying them or others.

100x500 is a nice figure, but I can imagine something like 50x600 working okay, due to the fact that 1024x768 is making the standard today (non mobile wise).

As long as it doesn't cause others to have to scroll then you are fine.

Whenever I try to do signatures, I try to keep the readers as the priority, not my own.
Huge sigs by using very long or detailed animated gifs are another issue, and that's the bandwidth problem. I think as long as the size is within ~70kb or less then that's the accepted standard.

BTW, as per VIP allocations Karissa, it is said that you are allowed two pics a sig. Regular members only 1.
Click to expand...
You're right. It's a matter of courtesy.

If members want to use more than one image, they can use a randomizer. That's what I'm using for over 40 images in my signature. ;)
 
VamPyroX said:
Some images are also from our own server.

It's not a matter of using bandwidth. It's a matter of what other members see.

A typical post is at least 800 pixels high and leaves an average space of between 80 and 100 pixels high. By making the signature image bigger than 800, it forces the page to load at a wider view and members may have to scroll sideways just to view a thread or post.

Having a signature that's higher than 100 pixels will force members to scroll down more just to read your posts.

That is why it's recommended that signature images are no bigger than 500 pixels wide and 100 pixels high.
Click to expand...


Gotcha. Mine is only 99 pixels high, and 288 pixels wide so that makes me safe enough. Thanks for the info! :)
 
Back
Top