Suggestion Increase Avatar size limit?

[Seriel]

I'm not saying it should be anything huge, but a limit of 50KB per avatar is a bit ridiculous in this day and age, I'm constantly having to either optimize the heck out of my images or export them as low quality jpegs just so they'll upload to this site.

Maybe something like 100KB or even 200KB would be better? 50 is kinda low in my opinion.

Of course it could just be my opinion, if you have reasoning for it staying the same, please tell me why.

 

[SomeGamer]

Me avvy is 304x304 pixels and under 50kb iirc.

It was 304x304. Got resized to 192x192 the moment you uploaded it to 'Temp.
http://gbatemp.net/data/avatars/l/285/285041.jpg

 

[Seriel]

There's no point in using transparency for your avatar since it will be surrounded by a frame anyway

Transparency on avatars works fine (Or it did when I last checked a few months back), so why shouldn't I use it? It looks a lot better than solid colour background, and theres no frame on profile pages.

Mobile connections and limited data plans should be enough of a reason as to why the limits exist.

I've browsed this site with a limited data plan in the past, and avatars are probably the least of your concerns, most threads have large images (Usually meme ones with no restrictions), and even then theres signatures and stuff which use a surpsingly large amount. Add ads into the equation and avatars being 50-10 KB larger is the least of your concerns.

Or if that really is a concern, this would work:

why doesnt the server itself resize images and then calculate the size and check it with 50KB or whatever?

^this would solve most of these issues, although I admit it would be hard to implement.

This really comes across as a non issue caused by lack of willingness to spend what you agree would be a five minute job max.

Almost every website around these days accepts my images (usually 100-300KB) without a single complaint, I dont see why I should have to spend at most five minutes in a graphics program to change my avatar because of a resctriction that was probably implemented several years ago when this wasnt a concern

 

[DinohScene]

It was 304x304. Got resized to 192x192 the moment you uploaded it to 'Temp.
http://gbatemp.net/data/avatars/l/285/285041.jpg

Temp resizes it yes, however, I still uploaded a 304x304 one.

 

[VinsCool]

There's no point in using transparency for your avatar since it will be surrounded by a frame anyway. Paint.net is one of many applications that handle transparency just fine though should you need it for something else.

Mobile connections and limited data plans should be enough of a reason as to why the limits exist.

Transparency is being working in here however.
There is a frame yeah, but the background of the transparent colour will be the same colour of the theme used here.

 

[FAST6191]

It probably is a mostly legacy thing, however as it should not really bother anybody (it is a minor customisation, not a logo for a company or something and you can still do a image that showcases all the things an avatar typically wants to showcase) and while there may be bigger things in a thread (outside of funny images we do tend to remove the multi meg gifs if it is just a reaction one or something). You also have the option to block external images if you are doing some kind of bandwidth discipline.

Even if it was on the line (I recall doing a random noise test once and that was only just over) then you would probably be instead invited to learn to computer art and work with restrictions.

 

[Jayro]

there is a clear difference between an original and a compressed one

PNG uses lossless compression, unlike jpg.

 

[Bimmel]

Since people change their avatars that often, I don't recognize them anymore. This is a real problem. Half serious.

 

[FAST6191]

Since people change their avatars that often, I don't recognize them anymore. This is a real problem. Half serious.

Does that mean the always funny joke of everybody swap avatars and signatures will not work as well as it once did?

 

[Bimmel]

Does that mean the always funny joke of everybody swap avatars and signatures will not work as well as it once did?

If a deeply confused user is funny, then yes.

At least the furrys never change their avatars that much. :-)

 

[Deleted User]

Sorry for the bump, but if we are working in KiB (which I assume we are) then here is a good reason why the 50 KiB limit should stay:

As of posting this, there are 376,605 member on GBAtemp. If all of them were to have a profile picture (which I know doesn't happen but hypothetically) then you could have a maximum of 50 KiB * 376,605.
Resulting in extremely close to 18 GiB. That isn't very small when you think about it.

Now, imagine if they even only doubled it. That is a max of now 36 GiB. Setting the limit to 200 KiB? 72 GiB. What I am trying to point out is that it is a lot of data for everybody to have a profile picture. If it bothers you that much then use Gravatar.

 

[Seriel]

Sorry for the bump, but if we are working in KiB (which I assume we are) then here is a good reason why the 50 KiB limit should stay:

As of posting this, there are 376,605 member on GBAtemp. If all of them were to have a profile picture (which I know doesn't happen but hypothetically) then you could have a maximum of 50 KiB * 376,605.
Resulting in extremely close to 18 GiB. That isn't very small when you think about it.

Now, imagine if they even only doubled it. That is a max of now 36 GiB. Setting the limit to 200 KiB? 72 GiB. What I am trying to point out is that it is a lot of data for everybody to have a profile picture. If it bothers you that much then use Gravatar.

A large proportion of users (the trash ones who sign up and don't do anything) do not have avatars, so that logic didn't entirely work
Also the server is storing an extremely large amount of posts and attachments already which probably exceeds your estimation multiple times
Besides, if this is indeed the case then it'd be nice to hear it from the staff themselves. If there is s legitimate reason for not increasing the limit then by all means keep it.
And I've stated in this thread quite a few times why I don't use gravatar for this site but have another one, quite a lot of the time I'm accessing gbatemp from a phone or tablet and not only is it difficult to upload to gravatar from a mobile device but even if I wanted to not use it there's no easy way to slim down an image for use on this site from a phone or tablet (tinypng doesn't work as I've already said)

In the end this was just a suggestion that the staff can either take onboard and think about, or give a reason why they cant do it and I would understand.

 

[FAST6191]

I am still not sure as to why they would want to do it, regardless of how technically or economically feasible it is.

 

[SomeGamer]

tinypng doesn't work as I've already said

It definitely does work if the png you upload there (and then to GBAtemp) is exactly 192x192.

 

[Seriel]

It definitely does work if the png you upload there (and then to GBAtemp) is exactly 192x192.

That hasn't happened in my personal experience but maybe I did something slightly wrong, I'll check later

I am still not sure as to why they would want to do it, regardless of how technically or economically feasible it is.

Mainly for convenience, having to trim down images to fit within small limits is kinda out of the way, especially if you are accessing the site from a mobile device most of the time
It could be though that I'm alone in thinking this through in which case fair enough, I was just making a casual suggestion and seeking opinions