Increase height of forum signatures

[Mario_Rinna]

728 x 150, this could do.

Too big. 500x125 was the best choice.

[Matt Murdock]

Yes, but people complained about slow loading pages and data traffic on their phones.

...

Data traffic on phone? what?

500X125 was great, highly supported, if you wanna keep 700x90, just remove the feature as it makes it very hard to create signatures and they don't even show up well.

Or how about disable animations? as I can barely think of a jpg image in 500x125 which consists more than 200 kb of space.

[~Legend~]

Everyone should just go to ASCII signatures.

:P

Wonder how many language packages are installed right now... would be interesting to see what characters work over this side.

[Brian]

I support this, it will look much better with increased height

[Duel]

728 x 150, this could do.

This.

[Thom]

Supported.

[Clone]

I agree with 500x125.

[Radagast]

I don't mind so much the width, it's the height that annoys me most, especially with signatures that never stop moving.

[JDC]

I don't mind so much the width, it's the height that annoys me most, especially with signatures that never stop moving.

I couldn't help but chuckle when I noticed the signature in the post above yours was also a .gif. :pop:

[SugarD]

I agree with 500x125.

That is what I put the limit as on ARFD Forums. It seems to be a decent alternative, as it stops people from going overboard, but still allows those with larger signatures to have a decent visibility of the images themselves. I wouldn't recommend anything bigger than this, though.

[~Legend~]

That is what I put the limit as on ARFD Forums. It seems to be a decent alternative, as it stops people from going overboard, but still allows those with larger signatures to have a decent visibility of the images themselves. I wouldn't recommend anything bigger than this, though.

Yeah.

Nothing wrong in showing off a cool pic or w/e, you just don't want it to become so larger than life that it becomes the topic.

[~Legend~]

Text size limitation (currently set to 9pt) and the line size limitation can be a tad frustrating.

At least keeps things neat, but some more breathing space may be beneficial.

[Antonio.]

Yes, but people complained about slow loading pages and data traffic on their phones.

...

They can use the computer or get better internet, because I doubt that a 500x125 image really causes problems for you.

Anything over 150 would be way too much.

My mistake. I meant to say 500 in width like the old one, which was already stated as being 500x125.

[SugarD]

My mistake. I meant to say 500 in width like the old one, which was already stated as being 500x125.

500x125 is actually a decent size without being too big, even on smaller monitors. I would personally recommend that as the max.

[Devin]

I have grown to like the new "restrictions" even though at first it seemed a little small, now at least the page isn't filled by signatures larger than many of the posts.