Avatar size

[lawnmowerman]

Hi Erling

Please can you help me with a problem with my Avatar.
I am trying to update my Avatar and I cannot seem to get it to fit in the window - you have to scroll the picture to the right to see the remainder of the bike.
I am starting off with a JPEG image of 1440 x 1030 pixels 306KB and I am using the resize function in Microsoft Office Picture Manager to reduce it to 175 x 175 pixels but when I upload it to the site it will still not fit within the Avatar box. The file size is well below the 75-100 KB size suggested in the help section.
Looking at other members' Avatars it seems like quite a few have the same problem, but some have managed to fit within the box.
Any tips would be gratefully received.

Jim

[Caretaker]

Hi there, as far as I know, in any current browser a 175px wide avatar should not scroll if one is using a screen resolution of 1280 x 800 or above, and viewing the browser full screen. Less than 1280 or full screen (or using a browser bookmarks\history toolbar at the left of the screen, or watching the browser window at less than 100% size), it'll give the avatar less space, & the scrollbar can appear. These days many pc users probably have at least a 1280 x 800 screen, so I'd guess some on the forum will get the scrollbar, some not. (And it's the way the forum program is made to distribute space between text and avatar. Edit: found a fix here, but I'd prefer not to try to experiment with it... maybe messing up the whole thing in the attempt !)

For the record, on my 1280x800 screen, your avatar shows in full with no scrollbar.

Anyway, solution: try using a smaller image, like 100 width, and see how it goes. For example, my admin 'tools' avatar is 67 × 63, and wont scroll before I've diminished the browser to like 500 px width.

Hoping this explains it.
(ps: anyone still with a 800x600 or 1024x768 screen, maybe time for an upgrade?)

e

[lawnmowerman]

Thanks Erling - that explains my problem. When I tried increasing the screen resolution to 1200 x 800 it removed the scroll bar appearance but obviously reduced the size of the text to a size which is not comfortable to read. Rather than get new glasses I will go for a larger monitor which I was thinking of doing anyway as the one I have is only 19" across the diagonal and is 15" wide by 12" high and advancing years mean that I will be able to see the detail easier on a larger screen.

I guess that size does matter - contrary to what we are all being told 

Thanks again

Jim

[lawnmowerman]

Shiny new 1980 x 1020 24" HD monitor now ordered so I can sit further back in my chair, see larger pics of the bikes on the forum and play my PS3 on it which leaves the TV for SWMBO to watch the soaps 

Jim

[lawnmowerman]

Just a word of warning for those who are planning to upgrade their monitors. I ordered a new 24" monitor to replace my existing 19" monitor which came with the PC ages ago. What I really wanted was a bigger 4:3 format screen but the whizz kids in marketing have deemed that everybody wants to watch widescreen movies on their PCs so all monitors above 19" are in 16:9 widescreen ratio.
The screen on my old 19" monitor is 12" high and when the new 24" widescreen monitor arrived, although the screen was a lot wider it was about 1/4" shorter than the old one. I was hoping that web pages would display a bit larger to make up for the effect of advancing years on my eyesight and to avoid having to use reading glasses. Good old Amazon took the 24" screen back and gave a full refund and I ordered a 28" screen which I am now using and is superb - it is sightly higher than the normal 1080 pixel screen at 1200 pixels.

Jim

[Caretaker]

PCs so all monitors above 19" are in 16:9 widescreen ratio.

Yep, it's a pain, I'l stick to 16:10 as long as possible, and many people (younger or older) have realised there is 16:9 dictature ongoing > http://forum.notebookreview.com/hardware-components-aftermarket-upgrades/392545-official-16-9-screen-protest-thread.html >

We need to join together and STOP the spread of these AWFUL 16:9 screens invading our beloved laptops.

[RichardL]

Yes, 16:9 is a drawback on laptop monitors, versus 16:10, as text height and page display are premium factors. Also, we are genetically programmed to appreciate the (approximately) 1.6:1 golden rectangle. In the movie theatres, a 6m tall head is probably enough, and panorama is at a premium.