[Turbo Charger]

Ok.. considering this is a car forum why is the profile picture size limited to 100x100? Last time I checked my car wasn't square.

I'm requesting that there be 2 selections for size. The 100x100 one is ok for front or rear shots.. but I'd like to see a 50x128 or something so we can put side shots in as well. You may say that you can still do that with the 100x100 size.. but that isn't a valid argument imo... it's just too small when you resize it to make it fit in 100 width.

 

[Dave]

Even a 50x150 would be the same as 100x100.

I agree with what you are saying, Id be able to put in some awesome burnout shots then.

 

[turbovanman]

It has to do with Bandwidth, bigger pictures take more, which takes more space, which takes more time to load etc!

 

[Dave]

How does it take up more bandwith if you are just adjusting the dimensions? If you are not making the overall area larger, than how does it take more bandwith?

 

[Frank]

It doesnt have to do with the dimensions but the root size. A 100x100 keeps the size limited because any more then that requires more pixal information and in turn more bandwidth. The garage is to be used for car... profile picture is for you... of course the garage has to work first.


Frank

 

[Turbo Charger]

Frank I hate to break it to you.. but that doesn't make sense.

100x100 = 200

so.. 80x120 also = 200

or 60x140 = 200.

If Rocky or whomever was more worried about bandwidth, I'd guess he would have put a limit on the size in Kilobytes. Looks to me like in his crazy business he just threw a number/idea in and didn't give it a 2nd thought.

 

[DakotaKid]

If Rocky or whomever was more worried about bandwidth, I'd guess he would have put a limit on the size. Looks to me like in his crazy business he just threw a number/idea in and didn't give it a 2nd thought.

Hate to break it to you, but you are wrong, there IS a size limit--see below.

Note: The maximum size of your custom image is 100 by 100 pixels or 97.7 KB (whichever is smaller).

So yeah, there was a 2nd thought. :bash:

 

[Frank]

Frank I hate to break it to you.. but that doesn't make sense.

100x100 = 200

so.. 80x120 also = 200

or 60x140 = 200.

If Rocky or whomever was more worried about bandwidth, I'd guess he would have put a limit on the size in Kilobytes. Looks to me like in his crazy business he just threw a number/idea in and didn't give it a 2nd thought.

I miss read above in terms of size.

 

[sdac_guy]

Well since it seems there is a math malfunction in this thread:

100x100 = 200

so.. 80x120 also = 200

or 60x140 = 200.

Adding them is incorrect, they should be multiplied. Actually a 100 pixel by 100 pixel image has 10,000 pixels or

100x100 = 10,000

80x120 = 9,600

60x140 = 8400

and remember, that is in pixels not bytes.

So making a shorter x longer image available as suggested would actually save file size and bandwidth. However, it may be more difficult for the board software to check for, or display, various sizes, I don't know.

Having the options for sizing as Bryan mentioned makes the animated avatars possible.

However, I agree with Frank that your avatar or profile picture was never intended to be the place to show off your ride. It was only meant to be large enough for an identity image.

Barry

 

[Turbo Charger]

Hate to break it to you, but you are wrong, there IS a size limit--see below.

Note: The maximum size of your custom image is 100 by 100 pixels or 97.7 KB (whichever is smaller).

So yeah, there was a 2nd thought. :bash:

Yeah.. well I provided the 3rd thought.

It was only meant to be large enough for an identity image.

That still doesn't have anything to do with anything. The fact is no one can use a 120x80 photo even if its less than 97.7kb. It would not mess up the board if its laid out properly, which it appears to be.

Anyways.. whatever. Hopefully someone with board editing power will understand and agree.