Photos in Signature line?

Deb · Post by **Deb** » 12 Nov 2006, 18:18

Are we allowed to add a photo "banner" to our signature line? I mean an image only, not an advertisement for any website or product. Just an image.

If this is allowed, what are the max dimensions?
Thanks.

(I wasn't sure what forum to post in and I couldn't find the answer to this in the FAQ or HELP!
nor with a forum search.)

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 13 Nov 2006, 16:14

Good question. I don't know the answer but I do think there should be a limit - how to enforce it is a different matter, I think it would be "manual", with the moderator team being responsible to "administering warnings".

--
Mats

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 13 Nov 2006, 16:34

For what its worth, those signature graphics/banners REALLY irritate me, especially when then the take up more room than the text, and when they're animated.

One of the reasons I'm a member of PC is because there isn't any of that stuff.

Its really off-putting when you have to struggle to locate the text you wish to read.

I think there is plenty of room for personalisation with the avatars.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 13 Nov 2006, 16:42

I agree... I just this morning had the experience of some flashing logos at the bottom of the post, which is pretty off-putting when you try to read the text itself.

--
Mats

Deb · Post by **Deb** » 13 Nov 2006, 16:59

Well, I wasn't planning anything silly, or big, or animated. That isn't my style at all. I just wanted some information.
Which you don't seem to have.

If you feel so strongly about it, why isn't there a policy?
Many sites have failrly strict rules about signature images, and often allow them only to those who have become benefactors of the site. A typical maximum allowed image size is 468 x 60.

What will happen on PC is that those who don't care whether you like looking at their images or not, will post those annoying, garishly colored, animated ones that pop out at you - and those, like me, who were considering something much more dignified and smaller, will not display one at all, now that I know how you feel about it.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 13 Nov 2006, 17:06

Deb,

if you put something small and nice in there, fine by me. As long as it's not too big or "flashing", I'm fine by that...

--
Mats

Deb · Post by **Deb** » 13 Nov 2006, 17:26

Well, I don't think I will, now, but thanks, Mats.
It was something I was considering, and I would have removed my avatar, if I had done it.
I don't go in for too many images, myself.

racoll · Post by **racoll** » 13 Nov 2006, 17:44

Sorry if my words sounded a bit harsh there Deb.

Wasn't meant to be an attack on you.

Deb · Post by **Deb** » 13 Nov 2006, 18:19

I know, I'm not offended. You have a strong opinion about it, and the way I look at it is, if two prominent members say they are against a thing, I think I should be guided by what they say.

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 16 Nov 2006, 11:59

There's no rule against it (I have one) but it's a matter of how (stupid Vs cool) you want to look in front of your peers!

The speak easy is the right forum for this as I don't think it involves me.

Moderators would only get involved in the same way as if someones signature line had inappropriate text in it. We might argue that a 600x300 image is a bit much!

Jools

sidguppy · Post by **sidguppy** » 16 Nov 2006, 19:44

I second MatsP, Racoll and others in this.

the forum already is huuuuuuuge and plenty pretty enough with the avatars and the cartooncatfishes on top.
the last thing we need is all kind of spamlooking flashing pagewide pix of godknowswhat.....

Also; often these pix are links. already the forum's slow on occasion, often really hard to move or anything!
adding extra pix, moving animations and linked banners won't help one bit on this.....

just my 2 dollars, but YMMV

if we DO get those pix in the sig, I already have THE PERFECT ONE!
alas, like in 90% of my life and ditto opinions I'll probably run headlong into some longtoed oversensitive bums who don't know that there's a switch on the PC and it can actually be switched off when it looks too offensive......
ah well....

YouTube · Post by **Jools** » 16 Nov 2006, 19:52

sidguppy wrote:Also; often these pix are links. already the forum's slow on occasion, often really hard to move or anything!
adding extra pix, moving animations and linked banners won't help one bit on this.....

Actually, it's 100% WRONG to state that large images in posts affect forum server speeds... There's a mod somewhere that allows you to switch off sig images, but there are 1000 mods that I need to get around installing and each and every one might break the forum...

Jools

sidguppy · Post by **sidguppy** » 16 Nov 2006, 20:39

oh, I agree, it might not affect the server at all. I have little experience with servers.

but it DOES affect the computer at home if it has to download lots and lots of hotlinked pix, each and every one a link to another site......if you got a brandnew PC or if you're on a broadband connection (like me) it's not a big problem; but if these two are no's, you're in for really onbnoxious forumbehaviour on your own PC if you're unlucky.

snowball · Post by **snowball** » 16 Nov 2006, 23:31

I have a very slow pc with a relatively small monitor and I am used to waiting for stuff to load, but when the whole screen is taken up by a single line post (as is the case on some other forums that allow photos in signatures) I tend to grind my teeth.

I'm sure deb that whatever you have in mind would fit in and be unobtrusive, but if everyone starts adding graphics then the forum could become rather messy - just my 2c.

Ron · Post by **Ron** » 17 Nov 2006, 04:26

sidguppy wrote:oh, I agree, it might not affect the server at all.

The server is onyl effected if the photo is hosted on that server, so there is no problem at all with the sever being effected in this instance.

but it DOES affect the computer at home if it has to download lots and lots of hotlinked pix

Exactly!

FWIW, I think that some sig images are cool, but most are annoying, bothersome, ect.