Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagayaki
All the annoying avatars are actually small files though. They're the flashing ones or the really short, fast, jerky loops. Longer, slower, smoother loops with more complex motions are almost always less annoying, IMO. Everything that makes animated avatars look good is facilitated by higher filesizes, not lower filesizes, so I don't see how placing a filesize limit gives animators any incentive to create less annoying pictures.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix
To be perfectly honest, the following are annoying to look at, - crappy animation
- crappy image quality (artifacts, overopetimization)
- choppy animation resulted from optimization
- avatars with animation puasing midway
- some other optimization issue (bluring, crappy cropping, etc)
But maybe that's just me. 
I don't know if I care too much about avatar size as much as I care for signature size limit. I don't see how something with 8 times the surface area is constraint to a LOWER file size! (50k bytes < 50KB) It's probably gotten way worse over the years with modern artwork becoming more detailed and refined compared to the blobs of color of old. |
Excellent posts. This gradual added detail and refinement is why I think avatar and sig size limitations - In the sense of bytes of data rather than actual surface area dimensions - Is something that should be regularly updated.
I was fine with Anime Suki avatar and sig size limitations until recently, but I've recently noticed how anime images are becoming ever more and more high-res, and as such I think there could be some benefits in shifting from a 50 Kb limitation to a 100 Kb limitation. And since nobody seems to be seriously arguing that bandwidth is the reason why the limitations are what they are, then I don't really see a good reason to not shift from a 50 Kb limit to a 100 Kb limit.