PNG SIG images now allowed

We've lifted the limitation on SIGs to have PNGs! Please keep in mind that all other rules for SIGs still apply.

Also, we are limiting these PNGs (and in the future, all SIGs) to 600 width x 120 height.

Please let us know if you have any concerns with a SIG image or text you intend to use.

 

120?

o god my precious 30 pixels!

But dats cool tho, png typicaly have a bit better quality.

Just curious as why there was a limit to start? png's tend to be larger, so for bandwith?

 

Double-checked my sig...and the image is not only exactly to spec...but it's already a PNG file...

...uh, good job, me from the past!

 

Yay Jack! You actually don't need to have a PNG format though, as PNG is primarily best for when you have areas of transparency. Could save file size by converting it to JPG.

 

Should Sticky this somewhere for future reference before it disappears into the void and new users come out with rule breaking sigs.

By the way, does width really mater so long as it's not too tall?
(I wander off into the distance to go back and check my own sig now.)

 

A link to those other SIG rules would probably also be nice. (Now we'll all need to go back and look at our sigs - myself included!)

 

Why the restriction in size all of a sudden? Either lots of people will have to re-do their signature, making it a major inconvenience, or only very few have one that is too big (making it unnecessary to change the size to save space). Can you please at least allow 125 pixels in height?

 

Change made.

 

While it's true that PNG supports transparency and JPG doesn't, a PNG is usually best when you have large areas of solid colour irrespective of transparency, a JPG is usually better for images that are more photographic.

 

My Sig has now 600 x 120px!

 

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Network_Graphics

Visually, between a .BMP and a .PNG, they are pixel identical. There is zero loss in quality. .JPG permits massive loss in visual quality, and is ... well, let's just say everything should be .PNG.

 

The concern isn't the image quality, it's the amount of data you're forcing all forum users to download.

 

Happily, users can disable viewing signatures if that's a concern.

 

Any chance we can get the signature space bound to the correct height to make it less difficult for players not familiar with image editors and forums?

 

I had no clue PNGs were even told not to be used in signature area. It is the first format I use because of the transparency when on a solid background like the SotA Forums. The size limitation has been around for along time so any complaints about that is a moot point. The fact PNGs weren't allowed surprises me, cause even without a good artist many would have it where it wouldn't be a problem when at the size limits.

 

I run any screenshots from the SoTA updates through tinypng.com to reduce space when republishing on my site. Helps save size and still have decent quality.

 

I'm going to be honest I didn't know PNGs weren't allowed as sig images.

 

Can you clarify what you mean by the correct height? Thanks!

 

Yes,

Creating an image that has the correct height so any text in your signature combined with that image do not exceed the signature height requirements is difficult for many people. How many pixels up and down do I need to go? It would be easier if the style sheet on the forums had a max-height attribute added to it to stop the signature from getting to large. The stylesheet references the class ".baseHtml signature messageText ugc" and would need a "max-height:120px" added to it.

 

The only parameters you need to worry about to make it look proper are the dimensions I gave above. The forums will simply place it in the signature section and voila, will appear under each of your posts. There are no other parameters needed.