# Signature Size



## Deleted member 161031 (Dec 26, 2016)

*~ THE SIZE OF SIGNATURES MEMBERS CAN WEAR HAS CHANGED ~*
​

The signature size limitations have been changed to *700x300px* and *3MB* for *all* members. Like before, this is for the entire signature, including any images, text, closed spoiler tags, etc. Stuff within spoiler tags counts toward the 3MB limit.

_
_​
Sigs adhering to the old height limit (550x500px) will have to be resized as they won't be allowed in the future. There is no rush to do it today or tomorrow (they have been allowed for years after all), but please, try resize as soon as you can.



Thank you ~

Reactions: Like 4 | Dislike 1


----------



## Sayaka (Dec 26, 2016)

Merry Christmas indeed.


----------



## Krory (Dec 26, 2016)

>Only 300 height


----------



## Puppetry (Dec 26, 2016)

Why? Was there a thread where NF users gave their opinion on this?


----------



## Demetrius (Dec 26, 2016)

Puppetry said:


> Why? Was there a thread where NF users gave their opinion on this?


/threads/revisiting-signature-size-dimensions.1078031/ 

Old thread


----------



## Aphrodite (Dec 26, 2016)

300 height is actually a good size for a signature anything taller is almost a wallpaper not a signature.


----------



## Dayscanor (Dec 26, 2016)

You need to decide once and for all about the signature size. Also it should be mentioned somewhere in the signature options in the user control panel what the current max size is.A lot of users just dismiss notices. That will make it easier for the users, and for the mods too.They won't have to PM people asking them to change their sig.


----------



## Krory (Dec 26, 2016)

Aphrodite said:


> 300 height is actually a good size for a signature anything taller is almost a wallpaper not a signature.



Well it was okay for ten years.

And if your desktop/laptop resolution is so poor that a 350 height is all you need for a wallpaper, something is very wrong with your computer.


----------



## Swarmy (Dec 26, 2016)

Is my current one ok cause idk how to check with the text


----------



## Disquiet (Dec 26, 2016)

Oh man, sigs can't be as tall now, that's great. I can save an entire two seconds of scrolling time per page. We needed this.


----------



## Aphrodite (Dec 26, 2016)

Rey said:


> Well it was okay for ten years.
> 
> And if your desktop/laptop resolution is so poor that a 350 height is all you need for a wallpaper, something is very wrong with your computer.



I was being sarcastic. Signatures dont need to be so tall.


----------



## Krory (Dec 26, 2016)

tfw I can't just render this and use it as a sig anymore

THANKS, OBAMA.


----------



## Krory (Dec 26, 2016)

Disquiet said:


> Oh man, sigs can't be as tall now, that's great. I can save an entire two seconds of scrolling time per page. We needed this.



It means a lot to those whole 2% of people that don't have sigs turned off.


----------



## Ignition (Dec 26, 2016)

Why not maximum height at least 400px? 
Or have a width limit for tall signatures so they don't turn into a wallpapers.


----------



## scerpers (Dec 26, 2016)

sigs definitely didn't need to be so tall. they don't need to be so wide either


----------



## Disquiet (Dec 26, 2016)

Aphrodite said:


> I was being sarcastic. Signatures dont need to be so tall.


Avatars don't need to be 350px tall either, yet here we are.


----------



## Aphrodite (Dec 26, 2016)

Disquiet said:


> Avatars don't need to be 350px tall either, yet here we are.



Avatars are fine. Though i do agree with you. Im gonna talk to the staff about making all avies 150x150 again. Thanks for the advice.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## scerpers (Dec 26, 2016)

150x200 is fine, thanks. stop ruining good things


----------



## Krory (Dec 26, 2016)

scerpers said:


> 150x200 is fine, thanks. stop ruining good things



So was 125x125


----------



## Krory (Dec 26, 2016)

fuckin why

I could just use this as an avatar instead at this point.


----------



## Aphrodite (Dec 26, 2016)

It's cute though Rey.


----------



## santanico (Dec 26, 2016)

no more jumbo sigs? awesome


----------



## Sayaka (Dec 26, 2016)

Rey said:


> fuckin why
> 
> I could just use this as an avatar instead at this point.



I wear that size all the time! its cute~


----------



## Krory (Dec 26, 2016)

Sayaka said:


> I wear that size all the time! its cute~



No it's not.  It's literally smaller than your current avatar. 



Is this really THAT bad? (obvious shit quality since I just blew up the small one, forgot to save the project lol)


----------



## Sayaka (Dec 26, 2016)

Rey said:


> No it's not.  It's literally smaller than your current avatar.
> 
> 
> 
> Is this really THAT bad? (obvious shit quality since I just blew up the small one, forgot to save the project lol)


Honestly? The render needs some work...I see some white sticking.


----------



## Krory (Dec 26, 2016)

Sayaka said:


> Honestly? The render needs some work...I see some white sticking.



I know that, it wasn't done for actual use purposes I just used the wand real quick and it was just blown up from the smaller one as i just said in the other post.

I'm talking strictly size here.


----------



## Sayaka (Dec 26, 2016)

Rey said:


> I know that, it wasn't done for actual use purposes I just used the wand real quick and it was just blown up from the smaller one as i just said in the other post.
> 
> I'm talking strictly size here.


The tall sizes annoys me. Like seriously sometimes it makes my computer slow cause it takes forever for the pic to load. Also 700 gives a HQ feel to horizontal sizes. compare to my old sig this one has better quality.


----------



## Krory (Dec 26, 2016)

Sayaka said:


> The tall sizes annoys me. Like seriously sometimes it makes my computer slow cause it takes forever for the pic to load. Also 700 gives a HQ feel to horizontal sizes. compare to my old sig this one has better quality.



I highly doubt 700x300 would load that much differently than 300x700. Literally same size just flipped.


----------



## Marco (Dec 26, 2016)

NoticemeEscanorsenpai said:


> You need to *decide once and for all *about the signature size. Also it should be mentioned somewhere in the signature options in the user control panel what the current max size is.A lot of users just dismiss notices. That will make it easier for the users, and for the mods too.They won't have to PM people asking them to change their sig.



This is the first time sig size has been changed ever since I joined this forum over 7 years ago.



Rey said:


> I highly doubt 700x300 would load that much differently than 300x700. Literally same size just flipped.


It would, actually, depending on your computer. Of course, the file size is going to be the same, but browsers eat resources. With heavy sized pages and less processing power (old computers, phones, etc), scrolling can be a very unpleasant experience because of "lag".

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Nello (Dec 26, 2016)

Swarmy said:


> Is my current one ok cause idk how to check with the text


No one is ever going to check how much space the text occupies so you're safe 


Aphrodite said:


> Avatars are fine. Though i do agree with you. Im gonna talk to the staff about making all avies 150x150 again. Thanks for the advice.


Why not 175x175 to use all the width?


----------



## Ignition (Dec 26, 2016)

Maybe forbid animated signatures and avatars if lag is the excuse here.
Seriously though, there's no way tall sigs won't load unless you still have windows xp or something.


----------



## Sayaka (Dec 26, 2016)

Well another thing is tall sigs are just so annoying to many people (hence why most people turn the option off). Though maybe upping it to 700x400 is a better option?


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Dec 27, 2016)

I actually forced this through using my tazmo connections because I dislike wallpaper sigs

you're welcome

Reactions: Like 3 | Funny 1


----------



## Marco (Dec 27, 2016)

That's not to say that the load is the reason that this size change happened. I am just explaining the problem Sayaka faces.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Krory (Dec 27, 2016)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> I actually forced this through using my tazmo connections because I dislike wallpaper sigs
> 
> you're welcome



I hope a dingo eats your baby.


----------



## Krory (Dec 27, 2016)

Marco said:


> Think of it as going from 4:3 to 16:9 screens



That doesn't help me.





> You know, I remember thinking there was an upgrade, but couldn't find what the previous one was?
> 
> What was it before the Gold upgrade?



Non-Gold members capped at 1MB filesize. Gold members got 2MB filesize.





> 1. A lot of times you'll see decent hardware perform badly because of the way it's being used. A phone, for instance, is almost always on (phones are optimized for that, but still). And then there's the people who constantly have backgrounds apps running. Laptop users who don't shut down their systems for months and years on end. You know how when you quit a resource hungry game/program and then the computer takes a while to get back into shape? Imagine that, but weaker and on a longer/steadier scale. That shit piles up.
> 
> 2. It wouldn't in the same context. When you're scrolling most websites, you're doing it up down. So vertical dimensions matter more. If you were scrolling left to right, horizontally big images would be a bigger strain compared to vertical.



1. Then don't browse NF while doing shit

2. But wouldn't it still have to register everything horizontally (scrolling vertically) so it would feasibly still take just as long as a vertical image that doesn't have as many horizontal pixels to load?


----------



## Aphrodite (Dec 27, 2016)

@Marco Stop being so freaking cute.

@Rey all you got to do is center your little render maybe add a border or not. Then make some little heart links under it where your linking to the profiles of your favorite people on nf and you will be good to go. It will still be small but you can work with it. Trust me.   Glad i can help you out.

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## Krory (Dec 27, 2016)

Aphrodite said:


> @Marco Stop being so freaking cute.
> 
> @Rey all you got to do is center your little render maybe add a border or not. Then make some little heart links under it where your linking to the profiles of your favorite people on nf and you will be good to go. It will still be small but you can work with it. Trust me.   Glad i can help you out.



You aren't helping shit, go away.


----------



## Demetrius (Dec 27, 2016)

Now now, Krory, settle down or I'll have to get the broom 

How often do you use tall signatures like those ones?


----------



## Deleted member 73050 (Dec 27, 2016)

>signatures 
>2017 

c'mon


----------



## Aphrodite (Dec 27, 2016)

Rey said:


> You aren't helping shit, go away.



Fine see if I try to help again.

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## Krory (Dec 27, 2016)

Aphrodite said:


> Fine see if I try to help again.



Good.

Don't.


----------



## Krory (Dec 27, 2016)

I probably wouldn't even wear a sig like that anyway.

Literally everyone but me has sigs turned off so no one would appreciate it.


----------



## Marco (Dec 27, 2016)

Rey said:


> I probably wouldn't even wear a sig like that anyway.
> 
> Literally everyone but me has sigs turned off so no one would appreciate it.


Again, you're thinking I'm making some giant point about why sig sizes have been changed.

The idea behind asking you to try that experiment is to see if you can recreate the kind of problems Sayako faces. Not that you'll actually have to load such an image ever.


----------



## Krory (Dec 27, 2016)

Marco said:


> I can give you emotional support.



That's what they all say.




> So if dimensions remained same during that upgrade, this is indeed the first time sig dimension limits have been changed in over 7 years.



Sig _dimension_ limits, yes. But you just said sig size. But I'm just being a dick over semantics.





> See, you asked Sayaka why 700x300 would be a different experience for him than 300x700. I'm just explaining that. That doesn't have to do with NF. That has to do with any website he comes across. Or others who're having similar problems.
> 
> Like I said before, if you want to discuss actual NF sig size change, that's not what I brought this whole thing up for. This was never once considered when deciding on size change and has nothing to do with the size change.



Then what _does_ have to do with it?





> Please try the experiment I asked you to. If you can't recreate it, try with 100x dimensions because your computer is in top shape (very niiice!).
> 
> If you still can't recreate it, just accept that some of us just don't have the resources, financial or mental, to get the buttery smooth PC master race performance you're enjoying.



Trust me, I ain't enjoying anything buttery smooth - who do you think I am, one of those 180FPS nerds? And a simple "yes" or "no" would do to my previous question. You guys don't always have to go into some big explanation.


----------



## Krory (Dec 27, 2016)

Marco said:


> Again, you're thinking I'm making some giant point about why sig sizes have been changed.
> 
> The idea behind asking you to try that experiment is to see if you can recreate the kind of problems Sayako faces. Not that you'll actually have to load such an image ever.



No, I'm thinking I'm not as invested in this as it seems because I'm not going to utilize what I'm arguing about anyway.

Sheesh, you people always think it's about _you_.


----------



## Marco (Dec 27, 2016)

Rey said:


> That's what they all say.



I'm not like your other women.



> Sig _dimension_ limits, yes. But you just said sig size. But I'm just being a dick over semantics.



To be fair, it's quite obvious from the comment chain that we were talking about dimensions.



> Then what _does_ have to do with it?



I can't speak for all staff, but personally, I prefer a wider signature.

Our old limit was only around because:

1. VBulletin with the default skin being skinny af.
2. Old display norms, considering our sig dimensions have been the same since the last decade.



> Trust me, I ain't enjoying anything buttery smooth - who do you think I am, one of those 180FPS nerds? And a simple "yes" or "no" would do to my previous question. You guys don't always have to go into some big explanation.


Which previous question are you talking about? I'm sorry, I'm just trying to answer your question, with the explanations.


----------



## Marco (Dec 27, 2016)

Rey said:


> No, I'm thinking I'm not as invested in this as it seems because I'm not going to utilize what I'm arguing about anyway.



Well, if you're ever again curious about the problem Sayaka cited, you can check it by using the experiment I suggested.


----------



## Krory (Dec 27, 2016)

Marco said:


> I'm not like your other women.



Girls are gross.




> To be fair, it's quite obvious from the comment chain that we were talking about dimensions.



Yes, again, I was just being an asshole.




> I can't speak for all staff, but personally, I prefer a wider signature.
> 
> Our old limit was only around because:
> 
> ...



Wider sigs in general did look nice but it was fun sometimes to just have a render of reasonable size and not one as tiny as one of our female staff representatives. Could make for a nice look.




> Which previous question are you talking about? I'm sorry, I'm just trying to answer your question, with the explanations.



I asked would one of 10,000px width and 4,000px (I think those were the dimensions) height not cause the same or similar effect of lag as one of 10,000px height and 4,000px width?


----------



## Marco (Dec 27, 2016)

Rey said:


> Girls are gross.
> Yes, again, I was just being an asshole.



Maybe there's a connection, homie?



> Wider sigs in general did look nice but it was fun sometimes to just have a render of reasonable size and not one as tiny as one of our female staff representatives. Could make for a nice look.



You mean, 300x height is not enough compared to 500x, right? Let's give it a try for a few months and see, I say.



> I asked would one of 10,000px width and 4,000px (I think those were the dimensions) height not cause the same or similar effect of lag as one of 10,000px height and 4,000px width?



Well, first, these figures are just examples and may vary wildly from system to system. For simplicity, I'll just refer to it as Long-width and Long-height images.

Like I said earlier, it would depend on the direction you're scrolling in. If you're scrolling up-down on long-height images, you'll probably have the same issues as scrolling left-right on long-width images.

It's not the file dimension or size itself that usually contributes to the lag/stutter. It's usually that the CPU is being taxed due to the various programs being run and it's general state due to overuse. So when you try to do things quickly, you get interruptions. If you scrolled through the same page slowly and with patience, you probably wouldn't have any problems.


----------



## Krory (Dec 27, 2016)

Marco said:


> Maybe there's a connection, homie?



Damn... I never thought of that. Now I know what Bioness feels like.




> You mean, 300x height is not enough compared to 500x, right? Let's give it a try for a few months and see, I say.



Yes, that's what I mean.




> Well, first, these figures are just examples and may vary wildly from system to system. For simplicity, I'll just refer to it as Long-width and Long-height images.
> 
> Like I said earlier, it would depend on the direction you're scrolling in. If you're scrolling up-down on long-height images, you'll probably have the same issues as scrolling left-right on long-width images.
> 
> It's not the file dimension or size itself that usually contributes to the lag/stutter. It's usually that the CPU is being taxed due to the various programs being run and it's general state due to overuse. So when you try to do things quickly, you get interruptions. If you scrolled through the same page slowly and with patience, you probably wouldn't have any problems.



I'll take that as a "no" then.


----------



## Seraphiel (Dec 27, 2016)

Tall sigs are ugly, adblocking is effort. Good job staff.


----------



## Marco (Dec 27, 2016)

Rey said:


> Damn... I never thought of that. Now I know what Bioness feels like.



You don't have to make it an LGBT thing, lol. My mistake though. I sometimes use the gender interchangeably online in such contexts. I just meant "partner" or "SO" etc. I am a guy, after all and referred to myself as a woman there.



> Yes, that's what I mean.
> 
> I'll take that as a "no" then.


Well, it is a no as long as you're talking about NF or scrolling up-down. It would be a yes if you were comparing long-height on up-down with long-width on left-right scroll.


----------



## Deleted member 73050 (Dec 27, 2016)

Seraphiel said:


> Tall sigs are ugly, adblocking is effort. Good job staff.


Or just disable sigs


----------



## Seraphiel (Dec 27, 2016)

Vino said:


> Or just disable sigs


no


----------



## Krory (Dec 27, 2016)

Marco said:


> You don't have to make it an LGBT thing, lol. My mistake though. I sometimes use the gender interchangeably online in such contexts. I just meant "partner" or "SO" etc. I am a guy, after all and referred to myself as a woman there.



I didn't make it an LGBT thing. I made it a sexist asshole thing.


----------



## Krory (Dec 27, 2016)

Sera has never not had sigs disabled.


----------



## Marco (Dec 27, 2016)

Rey said:


> I didn't make it an LGBT thing. I made it a sexist asshole thing.


Yeah, don't make it that either.


----------



## Krory (Dec 27, 2016)

Marco said:


> Yeah, don't make it that either.



You can't tell me how to live my life, you're not my real mom.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Dec 28, 2016)

I am tho


----------



## Krory (Dec 28, 2016)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> I am tho



M.. mommy?!


----------



## Deleted member 73050 (Dec 28, 2016)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> I am tho


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Dec 28, 2016)

Rey said:


> M.. mommy?!



>o

disowned tbh


----------



## Deleted member 73050 (Dec 28, 2016)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> >o
> 
> disowned tbh


Hold still


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Dec 28, 2016)

Vino said:


> Hold still



this only works on @Seraphiel


----------



## Deleted member 73050 (Dec 28, 2016)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> this only works on @Seraphiel


Hold still goddammit


----------



## Seraphiel (Dec 28, 2016)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> this only works on @Seraphiel


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Dec 28, 2016)

Seraphiel said:


>





Vino said:


> Hold still goddammit


----------



## Deleted member 73050 (Dec 28, 2016)




----------



## Stunna (Dec 28, 2016)

>sig size changed before avatar file size is fixed

ok.


----------



## Krory (Dec 28, 2016)

Stunna said:


> >sig size changed before avatar file size is fixed
> 
> ok.



>nothing wrong with avatar file size

ok.


----------



## Stunna (Dec 28, 2016)

Shows what you know then, huh?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Moritsune (Dec 28, 2016)

Limit dimensions to combat lag, but triple allowed file size, makes tons of sense


----------



## Krory (Dec 28, 2016)

Stunna said:


> Shows what you know then, huh?



1MB for avatars is fine. 

So, again, nothing wrong.


----------



## Stunna (Dec 28, 2016)

Rey said:


> 1MB for avatars is fine.
> 
> So, again, nothing wrong.


If 1MB was the actual size limit, maybe. But it isn't.

So, again, shows what you know.


----------



## Krory (Dec 28, 2016)

Stunna said:


> If 1MB was the actual size limit, maybe. But it isn't.
> 
> So, again, shows what you know.



So I assume you mean it's higher than that? Because my 1MB avatars worked just fine. Which, again, means nothing wrong then.


----------



## Stunna (Dec 28, 2016)

Rey said:


> So I assume you mean it's higher than that? Because my 1MB avatars worked just fine. Which, again, means nothing wrong then.


Look, I don't know what you did to get 1MB, but me and a lot of other users only have 585KB. Before the forum update, I had _over _1MB.

No explanation has been provided, so it would seem that, yes, something is wrong. Something that you apparently don't know anything about.


----------



## Krory (Dec 28, 2016)

I did what I always do - just upload the thing. herp derp. Sorry you guys don't know how to do it.


----------



## Stunna (Dec 28, 2016)

but by all means, continue talking about things you don't know anything about


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jan 3, 2017)

santanico said:


> no more jumbo sigs? awesome


They are bigger.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jan 3, 2017)

Stunna said:


> *If 1MB was the actual size limit, maybe.* But it isn't.
> 
> So, again, shows what you know.





Stunna said:


> Look, I don't know what you did to get 1MB, *but me and a lot of other users only have 585KB.* Before the forum update, I had _over _1MB.
> 
> No explanation has been provided, so it would seem that, yes, something is wrong. Something that you apparently don't know anything about.


Actually it has been for a while, something wrong on your end Stunna, it was stated a while ago that it's 1 MB for avi limits.
Mod/ maybe admin rights probably need to be readjusted if it still isn't fixed at this point.(seeing as you're somehow having that problem as a mod)
Or if it's not that it may have to do with another factor, find something in common with the other users  along with yourself and it should be easy to figure out.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Stunna (Jan 3, 2017)



Reactions: Friendly 1


----------



## Krory (Jan 3, 2017)

Unlosing Ranger said:


> Actually it has been for a while, something wrong on your end Stunna, it was stated a while ago that it's 1 MB for avi limits.
> Mod/ maybe admin rights probably need to be readjusted if it still isn't fixed at this point.(seeing as you're somehow having that problem as a mod)
> Or if it's not that it may have to do with another factor, find something in common with the other users  along with yourself and it should be easy to figure out.



To be fair, Stunna isn't COMPLETELY retarded - pretty sure it's actually 1,000KB which isn't a true 1MB, but still.


----------



## Krory (Jan 3, 2017)

Also I'm going to guess mods decided to not go through with this since @Mider T has been rocking a 867px × 620px sig.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jan 3, 2017)

Rey said:


> To be fair, Stunna isn't COMPLETELY retarded - pretty sure it's actually 1,000KB which isn't a true 1MB, but still.


tbh I don't know why it isn't just a true 1MB, that extra 24 matters sometimes.
Someone likes rounding I guess. 


Rey said:


> Also I'm going to guess mods decided to not go through with this since @Mider T has been rocking a 867px × 620px sig.


They aren't enforcing it hard yet.


----------



## Stunna (Jan 3, 2017)

Rey said:


> To be fair, Stunna isn't COMPLETELY retarded - pretty sure it's actually 1,000KB which isn't a true 1MB, but still.


----------



## Krory (Jan 3, 2017)




----------



## Stunna (Jan 3, 2017)




----------



## Krory (Jan 3, 2017)




----------



## Stunna (Jan 3, 2017)




----------



## Mider T (Jan 3, 2017)

Rey said:


> Also I'm going to guess mods decided to not go through with this since @Mider T has been rocking a 867px × 620px sig.


I can't even see my sig.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Jan 3, 2017)

Rey said:


> Also I'm going to guess mods decided to not go through with this since @Mider T has been rocking a 867px × 620px sig.



we have a very strong meme incoming but we're waiting on the implementation....


----------



## Krory (Jan 3, 2017)

Memes over members.


----------



## Eros (Jan 7, 2017)

My sig height needed slight adjustment. No problem. Ofc, now more gif availability is the plus side. 

Edit: Okay, this gif sig is awesome. I wish they'd start a new season of Akatsuki no Yona. I love the series.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Jan 7, 2017)

This Sucks!


----------



## Krory (Jan 7, 2017)

So, I guess this move was to try and encourage more people to just turn off sigs?


----------



## John Wick (Jan 7, 2017)

Rey said:


> So, I guess this move was to try and encourage more people to just turn off sigs?


big moderation controlling us like sheep subliminally fam


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Jan 7, 2017)

im almost always mobile when on NF anyways so i never see sigs lul


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Jan 7, 2017)

unless i hold my phone landscape style but what kind of barbarian does that


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Jan 7, 2017)

Rey said:


> So, I guess this move was to try and encourage more people to just turn off sigs?


Or not use them at all...

What was the point of this major restriction in options again ?


----------



## Krory (Jan 7, 2017)

Like, srsly, scrollbox sigs? Fuck that shit.


----------



## Krory (Jan 7, 2017)

~Gesy~ said:


> Or not use them at all...
> 
> What was the point of this major restriction in options again ?



I never got a reason. I got what COULD have been the reason, but "totally wasn't."


----------



## Dayscanor (Jan 7, 2017)

What the....my sig is 433x300, why does it show in a scrollbox?


----------



## Aphrodite (Jan 7, 2017)

Hmmm i will find out because its not supposed to be on all signatures.


----------



## Dayscanor (Jan 7, 2017)

Seriously, it still shows in a scrollbox, even though I resized it even further....

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Aphrodite (Jan 7, 2017)

Yeah i see. I am trying to find out why.


----------



## Seraphiel (Jan 7, 2017)

@Nighty the Mighty this turned out to be a better meme then you anticipated


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Jan 7, 2017)

NoticemeEscanorsenpai said:


> What the....my sig is 433x300, why does it show in a scrollbox?





NoticemeEscanorsenpai said:


> Seriously, it still shows in a scrollbox, even though I resized it even further....



On my PC, there's a scrollbox but on my mobile it looks like this:



That extra IMG tag might have something to do with it?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Jan 7, 2017)

Yup. I think that's what it is. You have an extra [ IMG ]  tag in your signature (no spaces).

I just tested it right now myself.

EDIT: Hm, actually I need to do some more testing. Might not be resolved.


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Jan 7, 2017)

Yeah, it appears that the actual height limit is 296px, not 300. Anything 297+ gets scrollboxed.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jan 7, 2017)

That's stupid.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Jan 7, 2017)

Also it scrolls you if you have the image centered.


----------



## Dayscanor (Jan 7, 2017)

wat said:


> On my PC, there's a scrollbox but on my mobile it looks like this:
> 
> 
> 
> That extra IMG tag might have something to do with it?


Doesn't show on PC. I'll try to upload it again, thanks mate.


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Jan 7, 2017)

Yup, you're good now. No problem.


----------



## Dayscanor (Jan 7, 2017)

Ok so I did that, there's no scrollbox, but I aligned it on the right, but it doesn't align all the way to the right.

There's that space that's left on the right, is something supposed to be there, like an ad or something?I have ABP so ads don't show for me.

Oh well at least that annoying scrollbox is gone.


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Jan 7, 2017)

There's the same issue present with left-align as well.


----------



## Ignition (Jan 7, 2017)

Yeah I had troubles with left align myself.
Oh well, time to find my old sigs.


----------



## Xiammes (Jan 7, 2017)

Trying to figure out what is wrong with the scroll, nothing under the 700x300 should scroll.

It should be known that even if your sig scrolls, it will not be considered breaking signature size limitations as the amount of room your sig is taking up will only be 700x300, meaning no more dinging for being a few pixels over the limit. Meaning actual content is only what matters.


----------



## Krory (Jan 7, 2017)

The problem with the scrollbox is that it exists.

Morons.


----------



## Dayscanor (Jan 7, 2017)

"If it ain't broken, don't try to fix it".

It sure looks like you guys broke some shit when you tried to fix the sigs, smh.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Jan 7, 2017)

Seraphiel said:


> @Nighty the Mighty this turned out to be a better meme then you anticipated



god wills it my friend

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Seraphiel (Jan 7, 2017)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> god wills it my friend


deus vult


----------



## Krory (Jan 7, 2017)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> god wills it my friend



This is why Steve Irwin died.


----------



## Marco (Jan 7, 2017)

Don't you guys get tired of whining. Admins don't get paid for this shit. They will fix it soon enough. You can blame me for all the bad browsing experience you have because 5 pixels from your signatures got rolled into the scrolling thing.

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## Marco (Jan 7, 2017)

I mean, seriously, just have fun. That's what the forums are for. Stop making everything into a "we're being oppressed halp" and just enjoy hanging out with your friends.

Reactions: Friendly 1 | Optimistic 1 | Dislike 1


----------



## Krory (Jan 8, 2017)

Damn, your sig looks like garbage with the scrollbox.

Sorry, brah.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Marco (Jan 8, 2017)

I know. Just been lazy about changing.


----------



## Deleted member 73050 (Jan 8, 2017)

Marco said:


> I mean, seriously, just have fun. That's what the forums are for. Stop making everything into a "we're being oppressed halp" and just enjoy hanging out with your friends.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Krory (Jan 8, 2017)

You'd think someone from 2009 would know more about NF and how it works.

Reactions: Optimistic 1


----------



## xmysticgohanx (Jan 8, 2017)

I need more lines need for my tier lists 

Shouldn't count when in a spoiler box


----------



## aiyanah (Jan 10, 2017)

just put your tier lists in your "about me" section


----------



## aiyanah (Jan 10, 2017)

Marco said:


> I mean, seriously, just have fun. That's what the forums are for. Stop making everything into a "we're being oppressed halp" and just enjoy hanging out with your friends.


what friends?


----------



## Deleted member 73050 (Jan 10, 2017)

aiyanah said:


> what friends?


----------



## dream (Jan 10, 2017)

Marco said:


> Don't you guys get tired of whining. Admins don't get paid for this shit. They will fix it soon enough.



Yeah, I don't get paid for this shit.  You think that you guys are more important than my qualify fanfiction reading time?!  NOPE.  Hold your asses until I finish rereading _Three Families_ by James Golen.


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Jan 10, 2017)

> Three Families seek the Avatar. Three Families find the Avatar. Three Families use the Avatar. The story of how three sets of siblings are changed by the Avatar, amidst an endless war. AU, Want of A Nail.



...


----------



## dream (Jan 10, 2017)

Best Aang x Azula fanfic ever.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Jan 10, 2017)

Chapters: 61 - Words: 1,236,700

wew


----------



## Krory (Jan 11, 2017)

Wait, why is Preet reading my fanfic?


----------



## HaxHax (Jan 11, 2017)

Feels bad man


----------



## The World (Jan 12, 2017)

ane said:


> *~ THE SIZE OF SIGNATURES MEMBERS CAN WEAR HAS CHANGED ~*
> ​
> 
> The signature size limitations have been changed to *700x300px* and *3MB* for *all* members. Like before, this is for the entire signature, including any images, text, closed spoiler tags, etc. Stuff within spoiler tags counts toward the 3MB limit.
> ...

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## xmysticgohanx (Jan 12, 2017)

aiyanah said:


> just put your tier lists in your "about me" section


 no one reads those


----------



## Black Mirror (Jan 15, 2017)

some solutions for the occuring problems:

Alter the {img} bbcode as follows: Add 
	
	



```
style="vertical-align:middle"
```
 to the <img>-Tag

this will prevent the scrollbar appearing even if the image height is exactly 300.

Change the max-width of ".signature" class to 100% or remove the property completely, removing the 700px gap which causes the space to the right/left side of the signature. This will prevent the content (big ass images) to break out of the given structure anyway.


----------



## Legend (Jan 15, 2017)

New rules suck ass

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Wilykat (Jan 15, 2017)

Checking in. I had the image ready a couple weeks ago but forgot to change until yesterday.  I am pretty sure the image is within size limit yet I see scroll bar. Did I miss something?


----------



## Marco (Jan 15, 2017)

AFAIK, it's fucking up the check for scrollbox by a few pixels. Try reducing the height by a few pixels.


----------



## Aphrodite (Jan 16, 2017)

Marco said:


> AFAIK, it's fucking up the check for scrollbox by a few pixels. Try reducing the height by a few pixels.



I just made a signature for someone 290 in height and it's still there.


----------



## Deleted member 73050 (Jan 16, 2017)




----------



## Black Mirror (Jan 16, 2017)

Aphrodite said:


> I just made a signature for someone 290 in height and it's still there.


can you show the example?


----------



## Marco (Jan 16, 2017)

Aphrodite said:


> I just made a signature for someone 290 in height and it's still there.


I just tried a 290pxl height and that works without scrollbox.


----------



## Aphrodite (Jan 16, 2017)

Marco said:


> I just tried a 290pxl height and that works without scrollbox.



I think it was because of the text.


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Jan 16, 2017)

yea text/chars take up extra pixel space


----------



## Rai (Jan 16, 2017)

Marco said:


> I just tried a 290pxl height and that works without scrollbox.





Aphrodite said:


> I think it was because of the text.



Yep, it's because of the text.

It's fine for me.


----------



## Aphrodite (Jan 16, 2017)

ℜai said:


> Yep, it's because of the text.
> 
> It's fine for me.



I am glad u still like it.


----------



## HaxHax (Jan 29, 2017)

Scrolling with the mouse wheel sucks balls now.


----------



## Aphrodite (Jan 29, 2017)

HaxHax said:


> Scrolling with the mouse wheel sucks balls now.



Omg i know. I use it a lot also and it keeps scrolling the damn sigs.


----------



## Unlosing Ranger (Feb 1, 2017)

Just move your mouse over to the left or right so it doesn't go past them or do it quickly enough it doesn't register it.


----------



## Tranquil Fury (Feb 1, 2017)

NoticemeEscanorsenpai said:


> You need to decide once and for all about the signature size. Also it should be mentioned somewhere in the signature options in the user control panel what the current max size is.A lot of users just dismiss notices. That will make it easier for the users, and for the mods too.They won't have to PM people asking them to change their sig.




Yes this, also for avi. Would prefer if I could see how much text/quotes occupy in addition to image so I can stay within limit but I will settle for size of sig and avi mentioned in profile so I remember the max.


----------



## Dayscanor (Feb 2, 2017)

Tranquil Fury said:


> Yes this, also for avi. Would prefer if I could see how much text/quotes occupy in addition to image so I can stay within limit but I will settle for size of sig and avi mentioned in profile so I remember the max.


It already is the case for avatars. When you go to upload one there's a line that says the max size allowed is 200*200 pixels. You might have missed it since it's small. But there isn't one for the sigs I can assure you that. Maybe if we could directly upload sigs without having to use a third party hosting image service like imgur, similar to how avas are uploaded, then it could mention the max size on the spot.


----------



## Nep Nep (Feb 16, 2017)

Can anyone tell me why my sig has scrollbars when it's 265x300?


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Feb 16, 2017)

Nep Nep said:


> Can anyone tell me why my sig has scrollbars when it's 265x300?



it doesn't?


----------



## Nep Nep (Feb 16, 2017)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> it doesn't?



Okay then how come I still see 'em? 

You're the second person to say you don't see them.


----------



## Nep Nep (Feb 16, 2017)

Take a look.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Feb 16, 2017)

Nep Nep said:


> Okay then how come I still see 'em?
> 
> You're the second person to say you don't see them.





Nep Nep said:


> Take a look.





my gut instinct would be that this is a skin problem and that it's inconsistently coded 

I use orange and u don't have em on orange

swap to orange and tell me what u see


----------



## Aphrodite (Feb 16, 2017)

I don't see scrollbars either.


----------



## Aphrodite (Feb 16, 2017)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> my gut instinct would be that this is a skin problem and that it's inconsistently coded
> 
> I use orange and u don't have em on orange
> 
> swap to orange and tell me what u see



I use the dark skin and im not seeing scrollbars either so it can't be a skin problem.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Feb 16, 2017)

okay

problem on neps end then

uh

monitor size?

browser you're using?


----------



## Aphrodite (Feb 16, 2017)

Wait i forgot i was using the allure skin.  

I switched to the dark skin and yeah scroll bars are there. @Nep Nep switch to the allure skin. It's a copy of the dark skin the only difference is the mod bars until it can get looked at.


----------



## Dayscanor (Feb 16, 2017)

The max allowed size is less than 300 px in width actually, it's more like 290.

If you go over 290 you'll get scrollbars.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Feb 16, 2017)

aight so

Orange
Allure

display properly

Dark

Displays improperly

someone other than me go thru and test all the skins and then report back with info


----------



## Aphrodite (Feb 16, 2017)

Nighty the Mighty said:


> aight so
> 
> Orange
> Allure
> ...



Lazy

It seems to only be the dark skin.


----------



## Nep Nep (Feb 16, 2017)

Aphrodite said:


> I use the dark skin and im not seeing scrollbars either so it can't be a skin problem.



That fixed it.

So it does indeed seem to be Dark skin.


----------



## Aphrodite (Feb 16, 2017)

Nep Nep said:


> That fixed it.



Yeah we gotta get the dark skin looked at.. kinda odd though cause the allure skin is just basically a copy of the dark skin.


----------



## Nep Nep (Feb 16, 2017)

Aphrodite said:


> Yeah we gotta get the dark skin looked at.. kinda odd though cause the allure skin is just basically a copy of the dark skin.



I sure don't know. 

I'm completely ignorant about HTML or any other website code.


----------



## Nep Nep (Feb 16, 2017)

Anyways, thanks Nighters, Steph!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Aphrodite (Feb 16, 2017)

Nep Nep said:


> I sure don't know.
> 
> I'm completely ignorant about HTML or any other website code.



Its ok lol


----------



## Black Mirror (Feb 16, 2017)

Did you disable the overflow on orange? Why is it still centered? Remove the width limit, it makes no sense. activate overflow.


----------

