[(JD)]

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
Is there a limit to signature image size?
We ask that you keep your images relatively small. As a rule, please do not exceed 125 x 600 pixels and/or 35k for a signature image. This will ensure that the forums load quickly for all users.


</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Ok, how does one compute this? I see a mod with a siggy that is 400 x 400. But if I multiply the 125 x 600 that's more than 35 k also... Tell me.

[LMo]

One can see the size by right-clicking the signature, then selecting properties. I don't know how it gets computed. The number of pixels refers to the resolution which contributes to the size of the file, but not the height/width size of the image.

[kimmydawn]

Yep, I don't know much about how it's computed either. I do know that the image that's referred to here isn't even 29k, though, so it falls within the request set there.

kd

[(JD)]

How do you find the 35k denotation? I can only find one or the other on pics, either the 125 x 600 or the k note. What is the formula for converting it? I'm not worried about size, I'm trying to figure out how to compute size.

[LMo]

I think there are more variables in the formula beyond the resolution and the height/width. I'm not sure you CAN do the calculation yourself. I'm no expert -- I'd google it if it's really important to know how to do it, I suppose.

[LMo]

actually, I think I'm both right and completly off-base at the same time. Check this out:
http://crowncamera.com/CALCULATOR.htm

[__zh]

good question _Sky!

as for mods or admin not being sure or not knowing the answer for forums they are volunteering in.........maybe a tech refresher course for the boards? sure would help the community to have correct infomation given out [edit--we are not aware of how siggy size/pixels/kbs are calculated or many other tech things of this forum so it isn't as if this knowledge is natural or innate.....to us it makes sense to have our trusted volunteers know some ins and outs of the community they donate their time to ]

we'd hate to see misuse of siggy size happening again as we're going to be returning to dial-up soon.... Re: Image and signature sizes---from a dial up perspective!!!

[(JD)]

hmmm yeah, good point zh. LMo... is DPI the same as pixel (why don't I know if dots per inch is the pixel size???) I should go google this, but since there are parameters on the site (request to self govern) I need to know how to figure it out... when I go choosing pics to use here for any reason. I was hoping someone could tell me. I am able to find the answer.... sigh was just hoping it was a quicker fix than that.

DPI refers to the picture resolution.
Pixels don't have any standard "size" of the unit.
</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
For print output: Multiply your desired output size by the optimal output resolution your printer needs. For example, if your printer manual says that the printer does its best work when an image has an output resolution of 300 ppi (pixels per inch), and you want a final print size of 4 inches wide by 6 inches tall, you need 1200 pixels horizontally and 1800 pixels vertically.

• For screen display: Match the pixel count to the amount of screen real-estate you want the picture to consume. Remember that a monitor uses one screen pixel to display each image pixel. So on a monitor set to a screen resolution of 800 x 600, an image that's 800 pixels wide by 600 pixels tall fills the screen.



</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

[LMo]

Whether your proposed graphic meets the guidelines should be apparent if you look at the properties of your graphic. I haven't seen any examples of graphics that don't show both the file size AND the height/width. That's why I don't understand the relevance of request about how to calculate the file size beyond curiosity. It's not that the mods are unsure about how to determine if a graphic meets the guidelines; that has nothing to do with the technical composition of what determines the size of a file.

Feel free to send me a link to a picture you are thinking about using if you're unclear about whether it meets the guidelines. I'd be happy to review it and let you know, or help you shrink it down to an appropriate size.

[(JD)]

Ok. If I right click on an image, or even someone's siggy, then on Properties, it will show dimension pixel xx x xx, and size in bytes.

Since siggys here don't have to be exactly 125 x 600 or less in each dimesion direction, how do you figure it out, if for example the one that is 400 x 400??? If I "take" 200 from the 600 to make 400 then can I add that 200 to the 125 making 325 and therefore it is within the parameters? IDK.

Then, where does the 35k come in? I haven't seen that on most pics, is it a designation for other types of pics, comes in thousand's? (Of what?)

My siggy is 7142 bytes. 109 x 93 pixels. Obviously it's small enough, but I only really know this because each of the pixel #s is smaller than the correspoinding parameter suggestion.

I really think someone who understands all this could explain it to me quite simply.

[LMo]

The 35k is the file size. If you look in Windows Explorer or in the properties of any file, it will show you the file size. Your siggy is 7142 bytes which equals roughly 7k. Divide the number of bytes by 1000 to arrive at the kb (more or less).

Height/width:
125 = the height
600 = the width

So...
- don't make it wider than 125 pixels in height or 600 pixels in width.

and/or

- don't use a graphic which has a file size of bigger than 35k

Does that make sense?

[(JD)]

OK. But with that guideline, the 400 x 400 is too large, so there must be more to the computing?

Yes yes on the K and Kb

[LMo]

yes, it sounds like it is too large given the guidelines. So are you complaining about somebody else's graphic, or are you wondering about one for yourself? I'm confused. Sorry

[(JD)]

Not complaining, trying to figure it out. I can see that the above mentioned would compute to 19k or so.

That confuses me further...as there seems to be no correlation between the two measurements. There must be two different parameters needing adherence, but yet that isn't so, because it's an either- or request.

[LMo]

But the thing is that we *don't* compute it ourselves -- the dimensions and file size are already provided with each graphic. It's a function of an operating system to provide the size(bytes) and dimensions of a file.

As I mentioned before, there is another variable involved -- the resolution/DPI. That's why it isn't possible to compute the file size JUST knowing the height and width. If you do know the resolution/DPI, then you can use the calculator I posted a link to.

[(JD)]

Well, I do run into pics that don't carry both. I guess it's the hating not knowing how to do this that bugs me. My pic I just attached to zorah's thread doesn't have both. It meets the one standard, but I have no idea if it met the other, I assume so... there has to be a correlation!

[LMo]

If you can show me where it is, I'd be happy to look at it.

[DocClyde]

Sorry all. I didnt realize it was a bother, really, but I can understand. I took off the image for now, and will look for something a lot smaller. I am very sorry if it offended or upset anyone...

Clyde

[(JD)]

Clyde, you work with this stuff... how does one compute a pic to be within the requested parameters (read up, you'll see)

[kimmydawn]

I think the usage of the term "and/or" in the request pretty much says it all. A signature should fall within both 125X600 and 35k, OR one of those. I've read a couple of past posts by docjohn and his emphasis was more on the signature being under 35k.

I've checked many signatures, and I didn't/don't find one that exceeds that request...including the Admin/Mod team.

I'd like to remind members that they can opt not to view the images if they have a problem with it for any reason.

Further, a kind PM asking a member about an issue is really a great thing to do from time to time. It can really accomplish alot sometimes. For instance, even if something isn't against guidelines but something that might be a personal issue, a PM stating that and asking a kind request is a cool thing to do.

Thanks,

KD

[DocClyde]

_Sky,

I really do not know how to get it within the parameters. I thought it would fit within, but I do not know if it did or not. I really did not think it fair for me to have something if others could not, so I got rid of it.

Wish I could answer the question more--I used to be better with computers than I am now--they have passed me by, I think.

Nice to meet you, by the way.

[LMo]

I know how to shrink a graphic to be a specific size if anyone needs help.

[(JD)]

Clyde, I didn't have an issue with your particular siggy, btw. It was reading your intro and my clicking on the siggy that made me wonder... it seems that one should be able to "compute" it out... for say, total space.. .which is probably the 35k guideline...

PPL sometimes think I know everything and when I ask about something, it's sometimes taken as a complaint.

I do know that larger siggys make it difficult for many members to wait for them to load. Maybe you could still use your siggy in a smaller size? (But I think KD said it met the guidelines the way it was.) As I said, that isn't my issue.

I want to know how to "know" what fits and what doesn't. Seems there is an easier way to do that than what I know.