User talk:TheRealLurlock/2008 10

Prev: September

Up: User • Talk • Cookies

Next: November

Image Size

Link
Reduce the size? As far as I'm aware the default thumbnail width is 180px. Increasing the image sizes to 200px will only make it worse for lower resolutions (1024×768), as it forces that particular size. I agree that with the current layout the text block may be a bit thin for 1024 width, but the other alternative is a large block of white space (if the images use 2 rows). If you have set your thumbnail size to any other setting in your preferences, I feel you do that on your own risk. --Timenn < talk > 13:13, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

I think Timenn's right. Mine appeared at 300px originally, but that's cuz that's what I had my preferences set to. When I reduced it to 180px, everything looked reasonable, even at reduced widths (to a point, of course). --Robin Hood (Talk • E-mail • Contribs) 21:42, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Well, at my settings (300), they knocked everything down the page unless I spread my browser all the way onto my second monitor. I think we should endeavor to make the pages look good regardless of your thumbnail settings. I'm also pretty sure that 300 at least used to be the default thumb size. (It's not anymore, I just checked with my dummy-account.) What we really need is some way to make pictures sized based on a percentage basis rather than straight pixels, but unfortunately, that's impossible (at least with the current software). Anyhow, if we can't get it looking good at both sizes, then we need to come up with another layout that does work at all sizes. You can't tell people that "you change your settings at your own risk". That's just unacceptable. Maybe if the three images were combined into a single 3-panel image? That would be a reasonable compromise I think. --TheRealLurlock ^Talk 00:31, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

The default was 180px when I joined, and that was probably about 1.5 years ago, maybe more (I could probably check in my history, but that seems a tedious thing to do <g>). The 3-panel image might work well, but anything else, ultimately, can look ugly if you try hard enough. I'm sure some moron out there will try to access the page from their cell phone or something and it'll still look ugly. :) --Robin Hood (Talk • E-mail • Contribs) 18:18, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

For now I've reduced the image size to 180px, as that is the default value. This is no definitive solution, I'm still playing around with CSS to get something better. My idea is to have the text appear under the images once a certain total image width has been reached.

Making a single image doesn't seem to be a good idea. Combining three images into one image width is too small width for a single Dremora. --Timenn < talk > 10:19, 3 October 2008 (EDT)

You're right...I wasn't thinking of the fact that of course the thumbnail for that triple image would also be reduced to 180px. --Robin Hood (Talk • E-mail • Contribs) 14:45, 3 October 2008 (EDT)

IRC

Hey you! We've missed you in IRC! Apparently that NickServ guy gets angry when you don't come around for a while, and takes away all your priveleges!  ;) Hope to see you around sometime. Don't be a stranger!  :) --GuildKnight^Talk2me 00:05, 14 October 2008 (EDT)