• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

FA Avatar Sizes

How big should FA's icons be?

  • 50x50

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 60x60

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 75x75

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 100x100

    Votes: 6 100.0%

  • Total voters
    6

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
There's been a lot of talk regarding FA icon size, so I figured I'd put it up to a poll. What do you think the optimal FA avatar size should be?
 

furry

Member
80x80 !

75x75 works, too >.>
 

Xax

Member
2x2!

you know you want it.
 

Xax

Member
Preyfar said:
1x1 alpha pixel avatars! Unleash your imagination... in single pixel form.

They could make mosaics. Lots and lots of mosaics.
 

UnicornPrae

Backed Up Author
Judging from the results so far bigger is better. hur hur hur gaffaw cough hur hur. So it appears most want the option of glorious 100x100 I had a site that insisted on 50x50 and I mean precisely that pixel count not even one smaller and my avatar looked just plain awful.

I would say that with avatars bigger is better.
 

Dende-snail

New Member
I can understand that people want big pictures but do you imagine how a deviation comments will look with these big avatars ? Yous may think about an alternative vers... Big avatars for forums and home pages and smaller for comments.
I voted 50x50 -_-
 

gryc_ueusp

New Member
Perhaps a default setting of 100x100, but a setting in the user profile to set thumbnails/icons/etc. to the setting of the user's choice.
 

Tabuu-Lion

Member
it's not the size of your face...o_O

I said 60x60. It's the most sensible size to me. That way putting your friend's icons on your page doesn't take up a completely huge amount of space.

I take it a lot of the people who picked 100x100 use the hugest resolution readily available on their comp e.e
 

Suule

Member
Well I'm not rich enough for having a 21" monitor, but I'm getting there...

I'm using 1280x1024. And AFAIK most people nowadays use at least 1024x768
 
G

Guest

Guest
Mine is 832 x 624 Default and can't go lower or higher than that and I'm not even complaining about the size... 100x100 is ahoy!
 

Pico

Member
The big avatars just don't look good on comment pages and watch lists. They're fine on the main page/profile of each user, but having a lot of big avatars all over one's page just looks bad, imo, and very cluttered. I definitely prefer 60x60 or 50x50. I have had no problems making a small avatar look good, and people on DA and SA don't seem to have a problem with the limited size either.
 

Tabuu-Lion

Member
gryc_ueusp said:
Perhaps a default setting of 100x100, but a setting in the user profile to set thumbnails/icons/etc. to the setting of the user's choice.

Hey...That could be a good idea...

That way, the people who like big avatars could have a big ass ugly pixelated and stretched version of my 60x60 avatar to display 100x100 for them, and I can have a small, smooshed and degraded ugly 60x60 version of their 100x100 avatar. And we can all be happy :p

No, I am not being sarcastic.
 

Tikara

The Local Purple Mew
If you ask me, I'm going with 60x60 and lower. Being most art sites have 50x50 and nothing but, the least we can do is make ours a bit bigger or smaller. Even if the 60x60 rule is in place, we can go smaller than that, such as 50x50. 100x100 is good for journals and forums and such, but when avs that are that big in a friends or watch list, that can get really annoting. Plus, they might take too long to load, and could really slow the site down.
 
G

Guest

Guest
lets steal an idea from LJ! Multiple Avatar options!

One for Comment, One for Journal, and One for Homepage!
 

TehSean

weasyl.com/profile/naoki
Went with 60x60 as that was the default size from FA Version 1, I believe.

Going with larger sizes means a negative impact on bandwidth usage. While the vote is nice, it's probably rather meaningless and only really meant to give the developer(s) a snapshot of what people most desire and will not immediately mean: Yes, 100x100 pix avatars.
 

Bravo

New Member
If the worry is the height of the avatars, why not go with something like ....

200 x 60

Enough room to do something, yet no giant gaps in posts/shouts/etc?

Personally I think 100x100 is still rather small, but with the format of FA, it does seem rather big since the individual pages are just so chock full of stuff.
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
Bravo said:
If the worry is the height of the avatars, why not go with something like ....

200 x 60

Enough room to do something, yet no giant gaps in posts/shouts/etc?

Personally I think 100x100 is still rather small, but with the format of FA, it does seem rather big since the individual pages are just so chock full of stuff.
Well, what I'd like to see are "user icons" and "user profile images". User icons have a standard size, e.g. smaller 60x60, but larger user profiles icons (say, 240x120) to offer more of a "headshot" style profile view that users can stick onto their main user page.

This way, users could have a small icon that reduces bandwidth overall, but it gives their user profile a nice, large image that allows for more personality. The user could use a smaller icon version of their larger profile image, etc.

The user profile image would stick to their profile, allowing people the ability to at least get some customization in there. At least, that's what I'd do if I were coding...
 

Bravo

New Member
Preyfar said:
This way, users could have a small icon that reduces bandwidth overall, but it gives their user profile a nice, large image that allows for more personality. The user could use a smaller icon version of their larger profile image, etc.

The user profile image would stick to their profile, allowing people the ability to at least get some customization in there. At least, that's what I'd do if I were coding...

That had been originally what I was using the css page banner and such for since the icons were just too small imho. ^_^; Having 2 separate avatars sounds great though.
 

Lili Fox

Member
Preyfar said:
Bravo said:
If the worry is the height of the avatars, why not go with something like ....

200 x 60

Enough room to do something, yet no giant gaps in posts/shouts/etc?

Personally I think 100x100 is still rather small, but with the format of FA, it does seem rather big since the individual pages are just so chock full of stuff.
Well, what I'd like to see are "user icons" and "user profile images". User icons have a standard size, e.g. smaller 60x60, but larger user profiles icons (say, 240x120) to offer more of a "headshot" style profile view that users can stick onto their main user page.

This way, users could have a small icon that reduces bandwidth overall, but it gives their user profile a nice, large image that allows for more personality. The user could use a smaller icon version of their larger profile image, etc.

The user profile image would stick to their profile, allowing people the ability to at least get some customization in there. At least, that's what I'd do if I were coding...

Yeah, I second that! I voted 60 * 60 cos I think to use a bit avatar for EVERYTHING (comments, etc.) would be a little tacky looking. But yeah, a large icon for the main user profile would look pretty good!
 
Top