Forum layout options

[kjnorman]

I notice that the forum in its new, improved look, has a fixed width. I was wondering, is there a way to set up the forum options so that the forum width adjusts to the width of my screen, like the AVS forum does?

Many thanks,
Kerry.

PS. Congratulations on the new look.

[Tom Snyder]

We wrestled with that... the site itself is a fixed width site, and from graphical standpoint it makes sense to make the forums the same width...

That said, we can set the forums to be a percentage width of the user's screen instead.. 80%, 90%, 100%...

Thoughts?

[Matt Heebner]

I too would like to adjust the width...almost seems clausterphobic.

I do like the new upgrade!

Matt

[ReesR]

I think allowing the user to control width would be a good thing. I also believe this is a huge improvement overall.

Three Cheers!!

[drgingras]

I agree with the graphics relationship, but would also like a slightly larger view. Hey, we're all used to a little stretch mode!

I seem to display at about 6o%. 80 might still look pretty good. Like the background color choice. Thanks for not having us look at black or grey bars.

Hope the avitars aren't affected by % - things could get really ugly, if you know what I mean;)

All-around great new look!!!!

Dave

[kjnorman]

For really long threads can I have a 16:100 aspect ratio? :D :D

[mr_yeti]

Great new look. I don't want to belabor the point, but the fixed width looks a bit strange to me.

Otherwise, fantastic! Love the new home page.

[Tom Snyder]

Definitely NOT 16:9! ;)

We'll be building a style that you can select to override the fixed width format if you want to...

Kinda like at AVS where you can choose between AVS Black background and AVS white background...

Should be up later today.

[ReesR]

Hey Tom:

While your at it, and if it's merely an option to activate, it would be really kewl to now get this forum on my pda. I had been reading it using the old software but it was kinda difficult at times to navigate. I'm crossing my fingers that it's relatively easy to implement.

Thanks

Rees

[mr_yeti]

Also, the color of the scroll bars on the bottom (white) sometimes blends with the white background.

Wow, that's really minor. Just thought I'd bring it up, though.

[Todd Wiedemann]

A minor thing ...

I like the avatars; it's nice to finally put faces behind the names !

It looks like, at least for now, most of us are using actual photos/webcam images of ourselves. That's great !

AVS insists that you use your own face, or none at all. I don't want to go there. Creativity is encouraged here !!

I did make one little change, though. Instead of 50x50 pixels in size, I've upped it to 80x80.

We're all about HD here, right ?? :D

[ReesR]

Originally posted by Todd Wiedemann
A minor thing ...

I did make one little change, though. Instead of 50x50 pixels in size, I've upped it to 80x80.

We're all about HD here, right ?? :D

I tried again with 80x80, but it just doesn't come out HD. I am using Photoshop too. :confused: Other forums usually use larger sized pictures which turn out pretty nice. For example, TreoCentral.com uses 150 by 150 pixels or 40000 bytes (whichever is smaller).

Rees

[Tom Snyder]

I noticed that it ripped up my image as well... although Kerry's looks pretty clean. I'll look into it.

[kjnorman]

Originally posted by Tom Snyder
... although Kerry's looks pretty clean. I'll look into it.

I scaled a picture of mine to 50x50 in photoshop and then resaved it to a medium jpeg (level 6 of 10 on Photoshop's scale).

As for the picture, well that is me in February 2000 looking very tanned (and fit :cool: ) after a week in St. Lucia. I took it myself with a video camera while driving out of London on the A40. It was a couple of months before I moved to Milwaukee.

I like the photo as its a cool shot and I was in my prime back then :p

[ReesR]

Originally posted by Tom Snyder
I noticed that it ripped up my image as well... although Kerry's looks pretty clean. I'll look into it.

Kerry is obviously younger. :D ;) :cool: Could that have anything to do with it? Hmmmm..... :eek:

[Todd Wiedemann]

Do you have the original image Rees ? I'd bet it wasn't 50x50 native.

If you take the original and down size that to 80x80 as opposed to upsizing the 50x50 you'd have the image you want.

Since jpeg is 'loss-based' compression, your seeing the 'loss' when you blow it up, essentially magnifing it ...

[kjnorman]

Have I gone HD?

I changed my image to the max 80x80 and now have the jpeg quality set to maximum (10 out of 10).

Must say I look better all the time :D

[Tom Snyder]

And you're still humble about, too!