Suggestion Signature picture quality could use a boost

[Cottontail]

I vaguely recall this being discussed before, but can’t find the thread. I’m wondering if it would be possible to bump up the maximum file size (not dimensions) allowed for signature pictures.

Right now, we have the following limits:

Avatars

Dimensions: 150x150 pixels

File size: 39.1kb

=> 1.7 bytes/pixel

Profile pictures

Dimensions: 200x200 pixels

File size: 78.1kb

=> 1.9 bytes/pixel

Signature pictures

Dimensions: 750x100 pixels

File size: 39.1kb

=> 0.53 bytes/pixel

By this naive measure, making pretty profile pictures is easy, while making pretty signatures requires feats of engineering. I’ve several times had to abandon edits to my signature after finding that pngout’s maximum compression still couldn’t fit me in under 39.1kb. In fact, the reason my signature is grayscale is that it allowed me to retain smooth transparency while remaining under the size limit. (No, it wasn’t for artistic reasons – spoilers! )

It would be nice not to have to make such heavy-handed trade-offs, although I do understand bandwidth concerns. Most people don’t bother with signature pics, though, so I’m guessing a modest increase would be a drop in the bucket, bandwidth-wise. I could be wrong.

Would it be possible to raise the signature size limit to at least 78.1kb, same as for a profile pic? This would still leave it seriously disadvantaged at approximately 1 byte/pixel, but would be a major improvement at the same time.

Thoughts?

[tiny]

@Cottontail

Most people don’t bother with signature pics, though…

I imagine quite a few people have signatures disabled too, so they’ll never see them anyway (except on users’ profile pages).

[gigglemuffinz]

Honestly the size of signatures now is the reason I’ve avoided using a picture signature, and the proposed change would definitely make me more likely to do so.

[Moo]

@Cottontail

I vaguely recall this being discussed before, but can’t find the thread. I’m wondering if it would be possible to bump up the maximum file size (not dimensions) allowed for signature pictures.

Right now, we have the following limits:

Avatars
Dimensions: 150x150 pixels
File size: 39.1kb
=> 1.7 bytes/pixel

Profile pictures
Dimensions: 200x200 pixels
File size: 78.1kb
=> 1.9 bytes/pixel

Signature pictures
Dimensions: 750x100 pixels
File size: 39.1kb
=> 0.53 bytes/pixel

By this naive measure, making pretty profile pictures is easy, while making pretty signatures requires feats of engineering. I’ve several times had to abandon edits to my signature after finding that pngout’s maximum compression still couldn’t fit me in under 39.1kb. In fact, the reason my signature is grayscale is that it allowed me to retain smooth transparency while remaining under the size limit. (No, it wasn’t for artistic reasons – spoilers! )

It would be nice not to have to make such heavy-handed trade-offs, although I do understand bandwidth concerns. Most people don’t bother with signature pics, though, so I’m guessing a modest increase would be a drop in the bucket, bandwidth-wise. I could be wrong.

Would it be possible to raise the signature size limit to at least 78.1kb, same as for a profile pic? This would still leave it seriously disadvantaged at approximately 1 byte/pixel, but would be a major improvement at the same time.

Thoughts?

Profile/avatar pictures are meant to be more detailed than sig images.

So, it makes sense that sig images have a smaller size limit.

The reason you’re struggling with yours is that yours is very detailed - more detailed than I wanted when I enabled the option for sig images.

That said, I’m willing to try giving DCs and TCs a higher limit.

So, I’ve doubled the size limit for DCs and TCs.

I might or might not do the same in future for ECs, depending on how TCs/DCs use it, and whether ECs ask for it.