First of all, why are people calling signature lines 'sigs'? This is a Sig!
Second of all, when did David TO change his avatar? It looks like that baby in the SuperBowl ad :wow
You win the prize. It only took 3 days for someone to mention my avatar.
First of all, why are people calling signature lines 'sigs'? This is a Sig!
Second of all, when did David TO change his avatar? It looks like that baby in the SuperBowl ad :wow
So, is the gear listed in your profile a must or a request? I have mine listed in my sig, but Im only using a portion of one line. Is it still acceptable, or no?
So, is the gear listed in your profile a must or a request? I have mine listed in my sig, but Im only using a portion of one line. Is it still acceptable, or no?
We'd like to see the gear list move to your profile.
Moderator Journeys/Sports/Big Picture :: Need some help with dgrin?
After dooms day, I think I will take the time to make me a sig. And add myself an avatar. And start talking again over in landscape more.....
Andy, am I still on the naughty list for calling your Avatar haunting?
Reminds me of the paintings on the wall in every scooby-doo cartoon....I thought I was being funny.... but now I see I was just using my usual donkey traits.... sorry dude...
For everyone against this simple adjustment: put the effort into wow'g someone with a post with fresh photography.
And for everyone that just doesn't "get " me or "like" me, dont sweat it, nobody does.....
Geesh, what a lot of fuss, over.....nothing. Besides, it's a no-brainer: get rid of the extraneous verbiage and scrolling. I look forward to the change, and will start now.
Geesh, what a lot of fuss, over.....nothing. Besides, it's a no-brainer: get rid of the extraneous verbiage and scrolling. I look forward to the change, and will start now.
I for one am for and supporting this rule/change, whatever you may call it. Big signatures are great, if you're on a desktop computer with a resolution of say, 1280x1024 or higher, one of mine here is 1600x1200, and the other is two 1920x1080 monitors, and viewing signatures with more than 5 lines, or large fonts or colors in it, really wouldn't be so bad, in that situation.
The problem I don't think everyone thinks of these days is this is the internet, and as such, these forums are not always viewed by everyone of high-resolution screens.
For example my laptop, which is pretty old but still functions great, a P3-1200 used just for web browsing and checking email when i'm not home with 3G-usb, which the screen only goes as big as 1024x768. Viewing this forums with that screen a few times, well, I won't name names or be specific, but there are some sig's that when viewed in a thread multiple times, used up more "screen real estate" than any actual post in the entire thread, including the embedded pictures by the OP.
Let's not even go to trying to view this forum and those kinds of sig's on a cell/smart phone, some of em don't re-size the website and big sig's there make the website nearly completely un-viewable.
I don't know about most of you, but the only reason i ever started to visit this forum, and still do, is for the photographs, i could care less what other websites the poster of a photo has, their galleries, or anything, when i click on a thread i want to see PHOTOS, not links, not mountains of text to wade through in sigs.
So... this change / rule, is a good one, it should make the website more easily viewable on different platforms, and for me that's a good thing, as it stands right now i can't even look at some threads on my laptop due to the size of the sigs, or what's in them.
Sony Alpha SLT-A35 16.5 MP DSLR
Minolta AF Zoom 70-210 F/4.5-5.6
Minolta AF Zoom 35-70 F/3.5-4.5
Places I post my work DeviantArt & FLICKR
Wow. With all this intensity over signature rules, it leaves me wondering what I have been missing all my life with just a small signature.
Sadly, the drama with changing of signature rules is widespread to nearly all forums. This doesn't really change the user experience here, so, I am all for the change.
My response was to show you that yellow-on-white is unreadable.
Which it did very well (I didn't even realize one could set their background to a different color), and yet, it took a second response to answer my original question.
[SOAPBOX] I understand wanting to keep signatures short, but maybe instead of legislating fonts, you should think about legislating background colors.
Sorry - crappy day at work. Can't help but think that if there is this much opposition to the proposed change, maybe it's not such a good thing.[/SOAPBOX]
Which it did very well (I didn't even realize one could set their background to a different color), and yet, it took a second response to answer my original question.
[SOAPBOX] I understand wanting to keep signatures short, but maybe instead of legislating fonts, you should think about legislating background colors.
Sorry - crappy day at work. Can't help but think that if there is this much opposition to the proposed change, maybe it's not such a good thing.[/SOAPBOX]
There isn't really all that much opposition in the big scheme of things. But those opposed are very vocal, making the reaction seem larger than it is.
it's more in vouge to scream and throw trantrums than it is to applaud and say THANKYOUAWESOMEDECISION and be accused of brown-nosing to the admins :P
I'd hardly call my posts throwing a tantrum or screaming. I didn't say thank you, or that it was an awesome decision. I did however indicate that I was going to deal with it.
My reason for asking what the default font is, was so I could see what my current sig would look like with under the new guide lines. What I got was, IMHO, a flip answer intended to show me just how wrong my sig was. Instead of answering my question (which would have ended my involvement in this thread), all he has done was add fuel to the fire.
I'd hardly call my posts throwing a tantrum or screaming. I didn't say thank you, or that it was an awesome decision. I did however indicate that I was going to deal with it. My reason for asking what the default font is, was so I could see what my current sig would look like with under the new guide lines. What I got was, IMHO, a flip answer intended to show me just how wrong my sig was. Instead of answering my question (which would have ended my involvement in this thread), all he has done was add fuel to the fire.
The easy way to answer the question is to try it out. Easy peasy.
I think Andy's post, with the example, points out exactly why color is such a hard thing to deal with. If I set the color in my post toall white, could you read it?
Moderator Journeys/Sports/Big Picture :: Need some help with dgrin?
I'd hardly call my posts throwing a tantrum or screaming. I didn't say thank you, or that it was an awesome decision. I did however indicate that I was going to deal with it.
My reason for asking what the default font is, was so I could see what my current sig would look like with under the new guide lines. What I got was, IMHO, a flip answer intended to show me just how wrong my sig was. Instead of answering my question (which would have ended my involvement in this thread), all he has done was add fuel to the fire.
Not here to contribute to the debate, but want to point out that if you go down to the very bottom of the page, that bar that is there, over on the left there is a option to change the forum colors.
What I am using, like many here, is white, not black, and with your yellow text against a white background, many here simply cant read your yellow message I am quoting. The color issue has nothing to do with creativity or choice, but with accessibility. You try to make a community accessible to everyone, and the black theme is not readable or usable by everyone, so the white theme gives a default high contrast theme for these people to use.
I am in favor of the no color text, simply because I would like to read what people have to say here, rather then have to skip everything that I cant read
Comments
You win the prize. It only took 3 days for someone to mention my avatar.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
I thought THIS was a Sig?!
We'd like to see the gear list move to your profile.
Not sure I care for all the changes, but it's free, so I'm not complaining.
BTW - what is the default font for the sigs??
Pentax K-x and assorted lenses
Something readable
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Shoot. Will do.
Andy, am I still on the naughty list for calling your Avatar haunting?
Reminds me of the paintings on the wall in every scooby-doo cartoon....I thought I was being funny.... but now I see I was just using my usual donkey traits.... sorry dude...
For everyone against this simple adjustment: put the effort into wow'g someone with a post with fresh photography.
And for everyone that just doesn't "get " me or "like" me, dont sweat it, nobody does.....
hmmm. rant over.
I have no such list!
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
www.SaraPiazza.com - Edgartown News - Trad Diary - Facebook
So, how do I get rid of that big gaping space under my one-liner?
Oh, I guess it's gone now.
www.SaraPiazza.com - Edgartown News - Trad Diary - Facebook
I was actually referring to the space beneath my new signature line. But it seems to have corrected itself.
www.SaraPiazza.com - Edgartown News - Trad Diary - Facebook
Richard told you why....
Your first message wasn't long enough to occupy all the space taken up by the stuff in the left column.
Got it.
But the space was even bigger in my first post with new siggie, then I went back in and edited it and changed the spacing.
www.SaraPiazza.com - Edgartown News - Trad Diary - Facebook
Thanx Richard - that's what I thought, but wanted to be sure.
I'll chalk up Andy's response to being a little punchy
Pentax K-x and assorted lenses
The problem I don't think everyone thinks of these days is this is the internet, and as such, these forums are not always viewed by everyone of high-resolution screens.
For example my laptop, which is pretty old but still functions great, a P3-1200 used just for web browsing and checking email when i'm not home with 3G-usb, which the screen only goes as big as 1024x768. Viewing this forums with that screen a few times, well, I won't name names or be specific, but there are some sig's that when viewed in a thread multiple times, used up more "screen real estate" than any actual post in the entire thread, including the embedded pictures by the OP.
Let's not even go to trying to view this forum and those kinds of sig's on a cell/smart phone, some of em don't re-size the website and big sig's there make the website nearly completely un-viewable.
I don't know about most of you, but the only reason i ever started to visit this forum, and still do, is for the photographs, i could care less what other websites the poster of a photo has, their galleries, or anything, when i click on a thread i want to see PHOTOS, not links, not mountains of text to wade through in sigs.
So... this change / rule, is a good one, it should make the website more easily viewable on different platforms, and for me that's a good thing, as it stands right now i can't even look at some threads on my laptop due to the size of the sigs, or what's in them.
Minolta AF Zoom 70-210 F/4.5-5.6
Minolta AF Zoom 35-70 F/3.5-4.5
Places I post my work DeviantArt & FLICKR
My response was to show you that yellow-on-white is unreadable.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Sadly, the drama with changing of signature rules is widespread to nearly all forums. This doesn't really change the user experience here, so, I am all for the change.
www.tednghiem.com
Which it did very well (I didn't even realize one could set their background to a different color), and yet, it took a second response to answer my original question.
[SOAPBOX] I understand wanting to keep signatures short, but maybe instead of legislating fonts, you should think about legislating background colors.
Sorry - crappy day at work. Can't help but think that if there is this much opposition to the proposed change, maybe it's not such a good thing.[/SOAPBOX]
Pentax K-x and assorted lenses
There isn't really all that much opposition in the big scheme of things. But those opposed are very vocal, making the reaction seem larger than it is.
Thanks for your input!
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
I'd hardly call my posts throwing a tantrum or screaming. I didn't say thank you, or that it was an awesome decision. I did however indicate that I was going to deal with it.
My reason for asking what the default font is, was so I could see what my current sig would look like with under the new guide lines. What I got was, IMHO, a flip answer intended to show me just how wrong my sig was. Instead of answering my question (which would have ended my involvement in this thread), all he has done was add fuel to the fire.
Pentax K-x and assorted lenses
The easy way to answer the question is to try it out. Easy peasy.
I think Andy's post, with the example, points out exactly why color is such a hard thing to deal with. If I set the color in my post toall white, could you read it?
Not here to contribute to the debate, but want to point out that if you go down to the very bottom of the page, that bar that is there, over on the left there is a option to change the forum colors.
What I am using, like many here, is white, not black, and with your yellow text against a white background, many here simply cant read your yellow message I am quoting. The color issue has nothing to do with creativity or choice, but with accessibility. You try to make a community accessible to everyone, and the black theme is not readable or usable by everyone, so the white theme gives a default high contrast theme for these people to use.
I am in favor of the no color text, simply because I would like to read what people have to say here, rather then have to skip everything that I cant read
JUst wondering if my Sig is what it should by the rules of this forum
THan you
Eddy
Great understanding is broad and unhurried, Little understanding is cramped and busy" ..... Chuang Tsu