Report, edit, etc...Posted by Gigins on 2006-01-15 at 08:20:59
First off, why I am allowed to add only 12 images from 3rd party hosts?
I mean whats wrong with having more? I think we should be allowed to add like up to 30 or 40 images. Or the limit could be based image size not count. Because I see nothing wrong in posting 40 34x34 images, like icons.
Anyway, please increase the image limit.
I mean whats wrong with having more? I think we should be allowed to add like up to 30 or 40 images. Or the limit could be based image size not count. Because I see nothing wrong in posting 40 34x34 images, like icons.
Anyway, please increase the image limit.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Freedawk on 2006-01-15 at 09:11:21
Like mine 
Actually I think I am fine with that because I don't see the problem with having only 12 as the limit. Maybe it is because of bandwidth.
Actually I think I am fine with that because I don't see the problem with having only 12 as the limit. Maybe it is because of bandwidth.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by BeeR_KeG on 2006-01-15 at 09:49:11
The problem with having many images instead of few isn't really size, because they can be both of the same size. It's that you have to open a new connection to the 3rd Party Host for each image.
That and having an insane amount of images in your signature doesn't look too good.
That and having an insane amount of images in your signature doesn't look too good.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-01-15 at 18:42:16
QUOTE
The problem with having many images instead of few isn't really size, because they can be both of the same size. It's that you have to open a new connection to the 3rd Party Host for each image.
That and having an insane amount of images in your signature doesn't look too good.
That and having an insane amount of images in your signature doesn't look too good.
The server has problems linking with another site too many times?
Actually, if the insane amount of images doesn't look good its the problem of the person with the sig.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mini Moose 2707 on 2006-01-15 at 20:03:52
No, any site will experience increased usage/load times with outside linking. Why do you think there are sites that disallow remort linking and image leeching?
Please tell me why you need so many images. Or combine your images.
Please tell me why you need so many images. Or combine your images.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Red2Blue on 2006-01-15 at 20:06:03
I guess its really the matter of:
Some people require a mass amount of images in order to fully understand something.
Ive never needed that many images before... why would you need that many dead?
Some people require a mass amount of images in order to fully understand something.
Ive never needed that many images before... why would you need that many dead?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Merrell on 2006-01-15 at 20:12:53
Some programs have a transparent option, if you want seperate pictures in your signature, put all of them on with a white backround (or some color that you didn't use), put your seperate pictures in, save as one picture as a .gif and select transparent at the save as screen, select color you want to be transparent, ok?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-01-15 at 21:32:49
QUOTE(Mini Moose 2707 @ Jan 15 2006, 05:03 PM)
No, any site will experience increased usage/load times with outside linking. Why do you think there are sites that disallow remort linking and image leeching?
Please tell me why you need so many images. Or combine your images.
[right][snapback]406944[/snapback][/right]
Please tell me why you need so many images. Or combine your images.
[right][snapback]406944[/snapback][/right]
Let me support the increase.
I always wanted the images for my dynamic statistics sig. I can't combine them becuase the programming alnguage won't support it. Not all that big a deal, but as long as the sumtotal of the images remains within 100KB, I think the increase would be fine.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Red2Blue on 2006-01-15 at 21:33:59
What number would it be increased to?
I want to put that amount just to see...
I want to put that amount just to see...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-01-15 at 21:44:59
I'd be content with maybe 25. For my purposes they're just 355-byte 9x11 GIFs.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Red2Blue on 2006-01-15 at 21:46:48
I see. I was thinking about making multi sliced images with different links tied to them. Something interesting.
Unrelated:
Its interesting how your image data is False! Its been saying 891 posts for a while.
Unrelated:
Its interesting how your image data is False! Its been saying 891 posts for a while.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-01-15 at 21:48:30
Yeah, I haven't had it been updating since a reformatted my hard drive a few weeks ago.
Multi link slice like the Pyforums banner?
Multi link slice like the Pyforums banner?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Red2Blue on 2006-01-15 at 22:23:58
Yes, something similar to that, only in a more graphically appealing sense. :wink:.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Gigins on 2006-01-15 at 23:59:51
As I already posted(looks like the post was deleted for some reason) I want it for topic posts not for sigs. Like increase the number only for the post that starts a topic. MAinly I need this for map showcase, like my GTA thread or StarFort, screenshots, logo, info images for those who doesn't understand stuff...
Also 12 image limit per post won't make it better as there can be 12 in every post, how about 5 image limit in posts and 30-40 in topic post?
Also 12 image limit per post won't make it better as there can be 12 in every post, how about 5 image limit in posts and 30-40 in topic post?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Sie_Sayoka on 2006-01-16 at 03:38:42
yeah thats a good idea.... more in topic post and less in reply it makes sense.
also a lot of small images can save file size. in some websites a big image is cut up into many smaller images. they are then pieced together like a puzzle so you see the complete image.
i dunno... just somehting i thought you would like to know
also a lot of small images can save file size. in some websites a big image is cut up into many smaller images. they are then pieced together like a puzzle so you see the complete image.
i dunno... just somehting i thought you would like to know
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Freedawk on 2006-01-16 at 16:41:30
The bandwidth might respond to too much images to a post. If too many images are on the website, the badnwidth might be slower and we could be slower than MySpace 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Red2Blue on 2006-01-16 at 16:47:34
QUOTE
yeah thats a good idea.... more in topic post and less in reply it makes sense.
also a lot of small images can save file size. in some websites a big image is cut up into many smaller images. they are then pieced together like a puzzle so you see the complete image.
i dunno... just somehting i thought you would like to know tongue.gif
also a lot of small images can save file size. in some websites a big image is cut up into many smaller images. they are then pieced together like a puzzle so you see the complete image.
i dunno... just somehting i thought you would like to know tongue.gif
Actually, banners and backgrounds are not sliced to make an image smaller. They are sliced to prevent viewers from locking up (due to dl lag), or to make it easier for the viewer to load. Its very easy to download 50 25kb chunks of data rather then a 1.25mb image. Its also nice to watch progress... rather then seeing the whole image pop up for a background (images show up as they are downloaded, backgrounds show up after they download; this depends on the type of image file that is used).
Just a little website fyi.
QUOTE
The bandwidth might respond to too much images to a post. If too many images are on the website, the badnwidth might be slower and we could be slower than MySpace ohno.gif
Nothing can be slower then myspace.
[/center][center]
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Freedawk on 2006-01-16 at 18:31:30
Even yahoo can't become slower than MySpace.
And I am even suprised that Xanga is faster than Yahoo, MySpace, and Google...
I guess this discussion is done
And I am even suprised that Xanga is faster than Yahoo, MySpace, and Google...
I guess this discussion is done
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Gigins on 2006-01-19 at 11:49:15
OK, I understand that this idea isn't going anywhere because I made no real suggestion on topic post. Here is my suggestion...
Change the image limit so you can post 30 images on topic post and 5 images on regular posts instead of 12 images on every post.
I believe it would work ok and everyone would be pleased
Change the image limit so you can post 30 images on topic post and 5 images on regular posts instead of 12 images on every post.
I believe it would work ok and everyone would be pleased
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mini Moose 2707 on 2006-01-19 at 16:10:05
Those values are not configured seperately.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Gigins on 2006-01-19 at 16:16:04
QUOTE(Mini Moose 2707 @ Jan 20 2006, 12:10 AM)
Those values are not configured seperately.
[right][snapback]410666[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]410666[/snapback][/right]
IT shouldn't be hard to make
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Syphon on 2006-01-19 at 17:15:46
I agree with this quite entirely.
Many times (Mainly in my picture thread.) Have I tried to post more than 12 to no avail, and editing posts really does bug me. This is one of the things limiting you from seeing the glorious visage that is my face more often.
Many times (Mainly in my picture thread.) Have I tried to post more than 12 to no avail, and editing posts really does bug me. This is one of the things limiting you from seeing the glorious visage that is my face more often.