• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Too big? Too busy?

E

Erik

Site Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 27, 2003
Messages
3,588
Location
San Jose, CA
I'm playing with a graphical signature. . . I'm not yet quite happy with it, but I figured I'd throw it out there for now. . . :)

What'dya think?
 
Yeah, tall graphical signatures only make the page taller, which makes us have to scroll down longer. Plus, your collage is to orderly; Try making the positions of the layers more random. & just a thought, but maybe some shadows will give it a better look? & you should try a different file format, (PNG Maybe?) because the text doesn't look right after you reduced the size.

(Please don't kill me Erik...)
 
Atari, he purposely uses that font with the ragged edges, to emulate the look of old terminal displays.
But yes, a PNG format would help with diffusion, but he needs to use jpg for maximum web browser compatibility.
 
Okay, last try for the evening. I spent too long in the garage cleaning up and need to get some rest tonight. . . for a change.

For reference, the first try was:
sigbanner3.jpg
 
Unknown_K said:
I am sure the dialup users will appreciate how long the pages take to load with those images.
Click to expand...

Dialup users? What are those?? :D

I did optimize them down to pretty small sizes, actually. They shouldn't be that slow.

What do y'all think? Is that an issue?
 
alexkerhead said:
Atari, he purposely uses that font with the ragged edges, to emulate the look of old terminal displays.
But yes, a PNG format would help with diffusion, but he needs to use jpg for maximum web browser compatibility.
Click to expand...

Yes I know, I used a similar font (fixedsys) on an advertizement for my website
ad.gif


I said it looks bad because the corners on the text aren't sharp because of the image being reduced in size while in JPG format.

As for the whole dial up thing, remember, the text on a page loads first, the photos load second.
 
In my taste, Erik's signature picture is still too tall, but he's the forum admin and decides the rules. ;-) I never quite understood the value in a graphic signature. Text and links, yes. On another forum I visit, with a much younger member group (several around 13-15, few above 30, extremely rare above 40), a lot of people have several graphic illustrations in their signatures, and it makes the page very long. Most browsers will though cache the images, so once they're loaded, they don't need to be loaded again.
 
carlsson said:
I never quite understood the value in a graphic signature. Text and links, yes.
Click to expand...

It depends on your style, I guess. I don't mind them, but I really only created this one out of a combination of exhaustion and boredom. I spent most of Friday and yesterday doing yard work and cleaning up the garage. I was left a spent hulk with little energy but it was too early to go to bed.

I loaded up Photoshop to dink around with some of my machine images and came up with that.

BTW, the background is the Kenbak motherboard. ;)

carlsson said:
On another forum I visit, with a much younger member group (several around 13-15, few above 30, extremely rare above 40), a lot of people have several graphic illustrations in their signatures, and it makes the page very long.
Click to expand...

On most of the car forums I visit they have graphical signatures as well, but that's probably the easiest way of showing off your car. . . the membership is much older than you are indicating.
 
Boredom .. I understand exhaustion but not boredom. :)

(This time of the year the yardwork is all consuming ...)
 
I don't think your sig is too big, although I personally try to adhere to the '4-line rule'. I do prefer the second (busier) example, with one exception: The Kenback should possibly be the main focal point, (front & center) as it was in the first layout.

--T
 
Erik wrote:

> I'm playing with a graphical signature. . . I'm not
> yet quite happy with it, but I figured I'd throw it
> out there for now. . . :)

> What'dya think?

Okay, though some freaky Psychedelic background would be
cool! :-D

Please?!?
CP/M User.
 
Erik wrote:

> Dialup users? What are those?? :D

> What do y'all think? Is that an issue?

Still working here Erik! :-D

I disable the graphics - so they aren't downloaded (beyord a
certain size!)

CP/M User.
 
Terry Yager wrote:

> I don't think your sig is too big, although I
> personally try to adhere to the '4-line rule'. I do
> prefer the second (busier) example, with one
> exception: The Kenback should possibly be the main
> focal point, (front & center) as it was in the first
> layout.

Yeah well - personally it's the contrast between the avatar &
the siggie should correspond with one another. The background
on the Siggie needs to collate with the Background on the
Avatar (or be something expermely freaky!).

CP/M User.
 
Erik said:
I'm playing with a graphical signature. . . I'm not yet quite happy with it, but I figured I'd throw it out there for now. . . :)

What'dya think?
Click to expand...

I like it! (It has a PET 2001!) :) But I think it needs to be clickable...

Cheers,

80sFreak
 
80sFreak said:
I like it! (It has a PET 2001!) :) But I think it needs to be clickable...
Click to expand...

Where would it link to? Back to my site homepage or these forums? :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top