These used to exist on a smaller level, and I'm starting to miss them. A lot of us users have images or text in our signature that just take up a ton of screen space, and yeah, I know I'm one of the culprits in this, but my one image was pretty small a while back and now it sort of seems like it grew more size's than the Grinch's heart (I can say that now, it's November). Both for myself, and for a number of other users, one of our posts with only a single line of text can take up my entire screen. This isn't a super big deal, because I know the staff are still working on a lot of technical stuff, but I thought I'd bring it up anyway because I feel that there should be a tighter restriction on signature sizes so we don't all have to zoom past a bunch of the same gigantic images every time we view a thread. Let me know what you guys think, whether you agree or disagree. Thanks for the read; ciao! EDIT: After messing with the themes, I discovered that this factor is not present in some of the other themes. Mike's Spring Theme and the Default Theme, for example, have it while the Everypony Spring Theme does not. Take that into consideration here; this is effectively just a post about those themes. I still want to know what everybody has to say.
I use Everypony Spring, so it's not really a problem for me. I'd like to see the resizing feature used in the other themes, though.
This is actually something, after recently returning, I found a bit distasteful. I approve of signatures as it gives users the ability to showcase some of their interests, etc. I don't really care for the overly large images though. I typically do all of my own graphics (avatars, signature images, etc), except for special cases, so the size thing isn't really an issue. I can just downscale my image to a size I find appropriate, usually no larger than 500x250 and then upload it to my photobucket account for image insertion- i.e. placing it in my signature. I do this because, as a general rule of thumb, it's a common courtesy. Most users don't want to see an image that large that has no correlation to the subject matter of the post. It's also harsher on users viewing in mobile or on a set amount of data usage. Bigger images, means bigger file size. That's data that they shouldn't have to waste. It would be nice to see the scaling feature implemented globally but, having said that, it shouldn't just be up to the staff to make sure an image is appropriately sized. Sure it's supposed to be an automatic feature but why should it have to be? I understand not everyone is able to do so but downscaling an image and uploading it to be useful isn't that difficult. Both Windows and Mac come with image editing software by default. It's a simple matter to download the image you want, resize it, and upload the image to a free image hosting service like photobucket or imgur. The whole process should only take a few minutes. It would also decrease strain on the sites server by not having to filter all images larger than 'x' by 'x' resolution and downscale them. Now, I know you might be thinking, "Well what about mobile users? How are they supposed to do that?" Simple. Mobile devices either come with an image editing tool or can download one in the form of an app. Many free image hosting services have apps that can be downloaded on mobile devices. Mobile users can do this just as easily as anyone on a PC. It might take a few more minutes but the whole process should still be relatively quick. The point I'm trying to make here is that every minute detail or flaw shouldn't be thrust upon the staff alone. The users should also help out where they can. Comparatively speaking, five to ten minutes of your time isn't as much as the staff spends keeping this place up and running. You don't have to do this but you do have the option. If you are interested, here are a few free image hosting services you can use. Imgur PhotoBucket TinyPic ImageShack If you don't like your default image editor, here's one of the most highly rated free image manipulation softwares on the web. It's compatible with Windows, OSX, and Linux. GIMP EDIT: Alternatively, you could download Stylish, if you're using Mozilla Firefox or Google Chrome, or some other css injector app and apply this css change. Code: .signature.messageText img { max-height: 100px !important; } Just change the '100' to whatever size you'd like the maximum height of signature images to be. This will only affect images in signatures, not the signature itself. This will only apply changes locally to your browser. Nobody else will see the change unless they do this too. Not all images will be the same height though. This only sets it so any image larger than 100px, or whatever you decide you want it to be, will be scaled to 100px. The width automatically adjusts so there's no distortion in the images. Hope this helped, -Nights
Not that I'm speaking for any of the tech staff on this, I don't know whether they're up for it or how much work it would be to mess around with it, but... a) Nights is right, to some extent. Users should be trying to be courteous of others by keeping their signatures succinct. b) Until something is done about it, assuming someone has an obnoxious signature, you could ask them to change it, you could change themes, or you could disable signatures (that is an option in settings, I believe). None of these are all that hard to do... Again, not saying we can or cannot work on it. Just offering other solutions.
