pouët.net

So, I tried uploading a new logo, but for some reason I always get an error message complaining about the non-standard filename, although the filename is perfectly fine (tomaesce.png). I tried different filenames, upload paths, browsers (Opera and FF), but no dice. Anybody else had this problem?

uh. just... wait 'till i get home from main, okay? :(

and feel free to bump the thread in case i would seem to forget.

Thanks Gargaj, I know you've been at Main and probably need some sleep. :)

and while you're at it, please add an "all of them suck" button at logos.php, will you? :D

tomaes: still am, actually (waiting for prizegiving :)

zomb: You do know about Sturgeon's Law, do you? ;)

tomaes, didn't know that, the more you know...! Gotta agree with it but:

I usually check the new logos, so most of the time it's only like 6, 7 of them. Counting the duplicates that is. And most of the time all of them suck. So there. Anyway - don't take it too seriously ;)

the thing that sucks most is that most logos don't use 8-bit transparency even if they need it but simply use a blue background.

If pouet ever changes the background colour 80% of all logos will look like ass. ;)

But yeah, a (glöperator) feature for deleting logos on request (wrong uploads, dupes, older versions etc.) would be nice as well.

can you try now plz?

Works. \o/

yeah it only worked for .gif during the bugginess, some people have uploaded logos with unicode filenames and i quickly copied over the avatar string-filter code, but avatars are gif only.

tl;dr: oops.

Got a logo with the resolution 465 x 282...
Well, would we great if I could somehow skip that 700x200 rule...

282 is starting to be really big for the height.

Those logos are supposed to be something on top, not the main point of interest of the page, especially since they are on every single page when enabled.

Agree, but it is not a disco-color stuff. It is a simple ascii one with some hand added motifs... in "2" colors' hue. So?...

rules are rules, once we start making exceptions they will quickly become the new rule ;) so i guess we better not do that...

also, if we want the site to be viewable also on minimal configurations (let's say a netbook with 1024x600), a 282px high logo will fill half the screen. add to that a ~180px browserborder, and one is left with very, very little space for the site itself ;(

Well, I got it when we talk about logos like Asphyx's one (with a head).
I have already tested it on the off-lined page and it looks ok, in the terms of screen information.
About the laptop's resolution - few dudes use that one. But even if, they can slide down easly. Logo is not flashy.
Besides, maybe noone is going to vote for that ;)?

Sim: according to scene.org's stats, most users use 1024 and below (for the height), that still means the logo would take 1/3rd of the available page's height in the browser.

-> Resize your logo like everybody does.

keops: 1o24 you say...
Resize, eh?... It will loose the quality... It is an asciii one...
Well. I will see. If the effect is gonna be poor, well, will leave it like that.

Looks _really_ poor due to mentionned ascii chars (dithering).

OK, I got a new one: 465 x 227. This one is smaller then already existed and displayed ones.
Dunwanna put it here since I'm gonna remove it from the server, where can I upload it than..?

there's like a gazillion free image hosts out there....

i would rather not increase the height... i use an 1280x1024 screen, which means i have about 800 pixels of reading area, so your logo would take more than 25% of it.

Sim: great!

Now you just have to resize it to the value we talked about and that was set to avoid filling too much space on the pages and you're done. That limit was set to 200 max for the height, in case you missed that fact in the previous posts :)