Signature size update for the times?
Why not bump'em up a bit?The year: 2002.
The plan: Make signatures less obtrusive and bandwidth friendly.
The result: 400x75x22kb.
And it was good.
But that was over 4 years ago. Screen resolutions have gone up. More people are on high speed internet. The forums no longer host images. I think we could handle a bump.
Nothing huge, still don't want them to be obnoxious. But I'm on 56k myself and I can tell you that I would gladly like to see better quality images. (I have my number of posts displayed set to 30-40 on most forums I read) My biggest complaint is that artifacts in jpegs are sooooo 1999.
I admit, this came about after discovering that Photoshop's "size estimation" when saving a jpeg blatantly lies (this sig is supposed to be 14k?) and after being made aware I was over with the old version, I was immediately annoyed at how little detail fits within a 400x75 image. A simple bump to 30-35kb would give so much more breathing room. Width and height I don't care about, I realize a lot of people don't like sigs taking up space, but I think we can handle a bit more bandwidth in this day and age.
Yes? No? Maybe? So?