When attempting to change my avatar, I kept getting the "Session verification failed" error. I tried changing the picture format, but then realised that SMF now only allows a max size of 160 x 160px for avatars.
Can this limit be increased? I'm pretty sure the Forum previously allowed much larger images (for instance, my current avatar is 1500 x 1500px).
Why do you need to upload a larger avatar? It's only displayed at around 160x160 (at most) anyway.
Quote from: namida on November 24, 2024, 02:04:12 AMWhy do you need to upload a larger avatar?
I guess I can resize, but the scaling algorithms in paint.net are a bit rubbish. If you can recommend a good image resizer, I'll do that instead.
Quote from: WillLem on November 24, 2024, 03:17:51 AMbut the scaling algorithms in paint.net (https://paint.net/) are a bit rubbish
Can you elaborate on what you exactly don't like about them? As far as I'm aware they have all the most used ones bicubic, nearest neighbour, etc. (which I'd assume the forum/browser/HTML would use anyway even if you could upload a large image as your avatar)
Quote from: Silken Healer on November 24, 2024, 03:20:45 AMCan you elaborate on what you exactly don't like about them?
See the images in the QuickMod Tool topic (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6339.msg104495#msg104495). The text is barely readable, and that's taking a large (1500 x 800 ish) image and resizing it by 50% using the Adaptive (Sharp) algorithm; the others produce even fuzzier results. Maybe my expectations are high, but 1500p down to 750p should still look pretty good IMHO.
The avatar looks OK (if a bit small), that's 500p to 160p Nearest Neighbour. If the Forum allowed, say, 240 x 240px, that would be better.
Out of interest, what scaling algorithm
does the Forum use to resize images?
Try the Lanczos algorithm.
If your tool doesn't offer that, consider Gimp (if you want a GUI) or ImageMagick (if you like the command line).
ImageMagick is common on webservers. I assume LF calls that. I don't know what exact arguments it passes; I'd have to investigate. But I'll only investigate after you've tried Lanczos and still don't like the results. :lix-evil:
People on Stack overflow suggest Lanczos. (https://stackoverflow.com/questions/384991/what-is-the-best-image-downscaling-algorithm-quality-wise) And: "Basically 'Lanczos' makes a great starting point for any sort of filter work" is from the ImageMagic docs (https://usage.imagemagick.org/filter/).
-- Simon
Quote from: Silken Healer on November 24, 2024, 03:20:45 AMQuote from: WillLem on November 24, 2024, 03:17:51 AMbut the scaling algorithms in paint.net (https://paint.net/) are a bit rubbish
Can you elaborate on what you exactly don't like about them? As far as I'm aware they have all the most used ones bicubic, nearest neighbour, etc. (which I'd assume the forum/browser/HTML would use anyway even if you could upload a large image as your avatar)
Yeah, this - browsers aren't going to be using something fancier than even a basic image editor.
Still, could we maybe increase the limit to 500 x 500 or... something?
Increased to 480x480.
Thanks for increasing the allowed avatar size.
Apologies for keeping on about it, but I'm still getting this error when I try to upload my usual avatar (which is now resized to 368 wide x 444 tall):
(https://i.imgur.com/cr8AxLH.png)
In the meantime, I'll use the placeholder (blue "WL"), which is 320 wide x 280 tall. Both images are in .png format (I've also tried uploading as .jpeg).
I wonder if the color palette is also limited for avatars?
If no solution presents itself easily and readily, I'll just settle for the currently uploaded avatar.
Quote from: WillLem on November 27, 2024, 10:54:16 PMI wonder if the color palette is also limited for avatars?
I very, very much doubt this. That's something SMF would have to go out of their way to implement, and I doubt there's much demand for it.
Quote from: WillLem on November 27, 2024, 10:54:16 PMgetting this error when I try to upload my usual avatar (which is now resized to 368 wide x 444 tall):
Sounds like an unrelated error. Do you get this every time you upload large avatars? I remember how you successfully uploaded a large cyan rectangle. Will it hit only big files? For a workaround, can you optimize your PNGs for filesize before uploading?
What exactly is the point with the big avatars when the forum will scale down anyway? Have you tried to downscale with the Lanczos algorithm before uploading? Were you satisfied with the results?
-- Simon
Quote from: Simon on November 30, 2024, 03:19:20 PMDo you get this every time you upload large avatars? I remember how you successfully uploaded a large cyan rectangle. Will it hit only big files? For a workaround, can you optimize your PNGs for filesize before uploading?
Of course,
filesize. I forgot to ask about that. Is there a limit?
My current avatar is 12.7KB. The smallest I can get my usual avatar without significant image quality loss is about 80KB. I could try optimising further, but it would be good to know what limit to aim for (or, if the limit can be increased to 100KB, that would help. 400KB would be ideal).
Quote from: Simon on November 30, 2024, 03:19:20 PMWhat exactly is the point with the big avatars when the forum will scale down anyway? Have you tried to downscale with the Lanczos algorithm before uploading? Were you satisfied with the results?
Lanczos is OK. I guess I just want to give the image the best possible chance of being decent quality before the site compresses it to avatar size. Otherwise, it will be compressed twice: once to match site allowances, then again to be displayed.
Honestly though, it doesn't matter all that much. If I know what the limits are, I can aim for that. At present it's all trial and error just to get anything uploaded.
Also, I likely won't be the only user who attempts to load a large(ish) image as their avatar, so the topic is here to benefit others/the site in general as well.
Suggested solution at this point: the Forum previously allowed quite large avatars and it didn't seem to cause any issues; I'd suggest meeting in the middle. 480 x 480 is a good height/width compromise, if there's a filesize limit I'd suggest increasing that to 480KB to match.
If there's a file size limit, I'd suggest lowering it to 20 kB to reduce wasted Internet traffic. Nobody needs a 480 kB avatar, especially on a forum dedicated to a retro video game. The entirety of VGA-only Lemmings for DOS is ~460 kB.
Quote from: WillLem on November 30, 2024, 05:40:01 PMOK, but I'd suggest applying that limit to all current avatars so that we can see how many people are affected by the change and have something to say about it.
Ex post facto rules are generally frowned upon, but FWIW, I saved all the avatars in this thread, and the largest was Simon's at 23 kB, so it really would not be so unreasonable.
Quote from: Mindless on November 30, 2024, 06:03:57 PMEx post facto rules are generally frowned upon
Yeah, that was meant as a joke to make a point. Hence why I deleted it.
Quote from: Mindless on November 30, 2024, 06:03:57 PMFWIW, I saved all the avatars in this thread, and the largest was Simon's at 23 kB, so it really would not be so unreasonable.
You saved the compressed versions. The originals are likely to be bigger.
Anyway, I went to upload my Xmas-themed avatar to get into the festive spirit, and have ended up having a days-long discussion about it instead. Great. :eyeroll:
Quote from: WillLem on November 30, 2024, 06:13:27 PMYou saved the compressed versions. The originals are likely to be bigger.
That's the whole point! The originals are *likely* bigger, but nobody can see them. Everybody only sees the resized versions, so that's all that matters. There's nothing magic about the resizing that happens on the server or in the browser. If you resize the image yourself, you at least get to control the resizing algorithm.
Quote from: WillLem on November 30, 2024, 06:13:27 PMAnyway, I went to upload my Xmas-themed avatar to get into the festive spirit, and have ended up having a days-long discussion about it instead. Great. :eyeroll:
That was your choice. Another choice would have been to just resize the image to a reasonable size using one of the more-than-adequate resizing algorithms in Paint
.NET, upload it, and be done with it.
Quote from: Mindless on November 30, 2024, 06:21:40 PMThat's the whole point! The originals are *likely* bigger, but nobody can see them. Everybody only sees the resized versions, so that's all that matters.
I understand that side of the argument. My point is that I can't upload the image because of some limit (likely filesize, I imagine it's probably 20-30KB). Even if we don't change the limit, people still need to know what it is if only to avoid the trial and error process of failed uploads.
Rather than wasting Forum time/space asking what the limit is and waiting for a reply, I thought I'd instead suggest that we increase it to a limit that I know would allow my picture to be uploaded. As a bonus, others might benefit from the increase as well (e.g. Simon when he uploads his own Christmas avatar).
Anyway, I've managed to get the image down to 36KB and it still won't upload. If 480KB seems too excessive, could we maybe increase the limit to 100KB?
Quote from: WillLem on November 30, 2024, 06:33:46 PMAnyway, I've managed to get the image down to 36KB and it still won't upload.
I just uploaded a 36 KB avatar and had no problem. There is probably something wrong with your file.
I don't know if there's a special way to make a certain avatar size have a certain file size, or if you just found that ghost lick one randomly online, but I found a 657 KB one to test it (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:(2%2B1)_D_KP_equation_traveling_wave_plot_2.gif) by going to an open commons licence website and filtering by gifs until I randomly found one < than 480 x 480 but bigger than the file sizes we've been talking about and it still worked.
I'll try uploading via a different browser.
EDIT: Yep, FireFox to the rescue :thumbsup:
Quote from: WillLem on November 30, 2024, 08:53:36 PMEDIT: Yep, FireFox to the rescue :thumbsup:
What browser were you using previously? I personally don't like Firefox because they are paid by Google to make their search engine the deafult.
Quote from: Silken Healer on November 30, 2024, 09:04:54 PMWhat browser were you using previously?
I use Chrome, but I find that whenever Chrome has some sort of fart, FireFox usually sorts it out.
EDIT: In hindsight, I should definitely have tried to upload the avatar via FireFox before starting this topic. Or, at least after namida increased the allowed size to 480 x 480.
Yeah, Firefox is infintely better than Chrome even if it is not perfect :lix-smile:
Although this is "resolved" in the sense that I've finally been able to upload my avatar (and have seemingly found a workaround that should work for others as well), I'd be genuinely interested to know why the avatar wouldn't upload in Chrome.
Quote from: WillLem on November 30, 2024, 09:18:41 PMAlthough this is "resolved" in the sense that I've finally been able to upload my avatar
Also, I don't want to feel like I'm causing a fuss over nothing, but 480x480 is still quite small. I don't know why it had to change at all. It just seems like an unnessercary change. It's just extra user inconvenience to make them downsize it when it worked fine before the upgrade though. I can't imagine avatar images are draining the bandwith for Lemmings Forums or anything. Also, this may just be me, but I like to open up images on websites that have been resized by clicking "open image in new tab" to look at the image in it's full glory. Again, I respect Namida invented the site so it's up to him, and I get that this is low priority and people are busy with a lot more important things in life. This is just my opinion.
I agree with what Mindless said about making it based on file size, but maybe a bit higher than his suggestion of 20KB. The file size is actually what you want to limit probably, and then people can upload bigger avatars. Everyone's a winner.
Quote from: Silken Healer on November 30, 2024, 09:23:02 PM480x480 is still quite small. I don't know why it had to change at all. It just seems like an unnessercary change. It's just extra user inconvenience to make them downsize it when it worked fine before the upgrade though.
Agreed. It was likely a default change when moving over to the new SMF rather than something that was decided.