Quote:

 

(Fenix, basic GIF) 17 layers - 17 kb (165 x 54)


(Lamer, complex GIF) 47 layers - 239 kb (112 x 100)


— A 222 kb difference

Quote:

 

(JPG) - 35 kb (450 x 125)


(Fenix, Basic GIF) - 17 kb (165 x 54)


50% difference in size.

Quote:

 

(png) - 141 kb (450 x 125) 


It's file size jumped an astonishing 106 kb

Quote:

 

(basic gif) 8 Layers - 1 kb (33 x 35)

Quote:

 

(png) 118 kb - (426 x 150)


(basic gif) 31 kb - (92 x 132)

Quote:

 

Firefox:

1) Download Adblock

Link

2) Restart Firefox
t%0

Ts'ao Ricky

Nov 9 2007, 08:20 AM

Hey Matsu, go spam in the appropriate area. And quocthai, How did Zhang Jiao live that long? I've played much as I recall he dies at early 50's if not taken with caution.

Matsu

Nov 3 2007, 11:44 PM

::Title::

Table of Contents(s) ™

• Preface

• Begin

• The Reason

• To Create

• The Fugitive

• A Discovery

• Additional Example

• The Future

• Additional Quotes

• Closing Statement

Table of Contents(e) ™



•• Preface ••

For having looked upon that drawing's ass after quite some time now... you notice - in that brief instant, that you've just beheld the greatness of the internet. To have the means, the freedom, to openly exchange information - to finally realize how truly wonderous a thing it is. For having gleaned the awe, and the beauty of her butts... We each sit around for hours on end - sexually enchanted, together as buddies... Which is, quite frankly, inspiring!

More so, the Internet's true potential greatly exceeds even that! It provides a service where people from the far corners of civilization become as one - socializing amongst themselves on what we call, message boards.

From the trolls, to the mini-moderator, to the lurkers - each person vyes for their place in our social heicharcy -- Each group, expressing themselves differently:

Trolls -

From witty quips, to the bafflement of others with redundant punctuation and unnecceasrily complex 'big words', taunting anyone and everything to a fight - being a jackass, is exactly what we trolls use to garner attention and the respect of our peers.

Mini-mods -

Apologizing for any supposed misdeeds commited by the staff, posting in topics simply to reference the rules, or to generally kiss-the-ass of anyone who's in a higher position - is just an extreme way of saying, "Look at me, World!"

Lurkers -

Hidden from view, though visble - these tykes believe themselves to be the most awesome things in existence. By honing thier senses and sharpening their blades they poise themselves to strike unwitting victims -- Yet, they never actually manage to do so. Rarely, if ever, would they de-lurk for a shower break. Put midly, they're ninja with poor hygenie.

-- They all, with their own misguided style. The fruits of their efforts reflecting in the way they speak, to the text in their signatures, to the titles they each give themselves - thinking they might somehow convince other people of their 'uniqueness'. They, slowly begining to believe, in the shallow recesses of their minds, that they're 'cool'.
Fearing rejection, they each dream to someday be embrased by the warmth of society despite any creative excuse to the contrary.

Not that I believe there's anything wrong with this. Heck, the fact that we each hold one another in such high-esteem, so as to hold-firm another's opinion of us, is very beautiful. Those passions, could be love itself.

Personally, I think that hotties are exactly what it takes to impress you. Is it effective? Well, it all depends on your reaction to that babe above (who merely fufuliled her purpose as a metal probe); and in that, I suppose you're to be the sole judge of her sexy goods. Despite that... if I couldn't, for some reason, post her then the way I present myself takes a nose-dive.

Cont.

... you have since then minimized these once treasured standards, which range from GIF bans to the regulation of signature size - done in an honest attempt to accomodate a wider range of members. Though honorable, your intent: You may have hindered the members' potential to fully customize their profile.

(Don't misunderstand, I partially agree: signatures were, then, able to break page frames. Heck, in those days I had a pair of GIF's which both exceeded 500kb in file size {passing as short-films}. 1MB of data coming from a single person is probably unneeded.)

•• To Begin ••

I'd truly appreciate it if you, by some miracle, decide to delve any further down this path. (Play this song!) But know that the complete understanding of this may come to pass only with your patience.

To start: I'm just a bored guy (with plenty of time on hand) who's only wish is to place bouncy objects in his signature (that, among other things). Though alternatively, my true passion is to waste your precious time! This thread probably won't convience you to clearly see things from my prospective... in even the slightest bit. Mileage may vary!

So, Rule #10. Where, exactly, do we begin? Well, even if we did somehow discover any apparent flaw in it's design, then how would we even fathom a solution (especially with the staff remaining so reserved in pubic affairs)?

"Blind as a bat" though I be, this particular exchange fully takes into account the boundaries imposed by our host, InvisionFree; That they reject foriegn code (which may explain why so many of our humble suggestions go unanswered). One might assume that the staff realized our collective circumstance long ago and made a daring attempt to relocate — Yet they remained here, so as not to fragment the community (being unable to shift that pesky database elsewhere didn't help).

Regardless of that, to manipulate the issue (below), using the host as grounds to conveiniatantly ignore this woeful plea is... amusing behind closed doors?

=> Canned.

I must admit that for a person like me to have delivered the depth of common sense in such an honest, and simple tone was quite the challange — Though-by gaining your attention, we are now encharged to establish staff motives.

We will hereby determine the very essence of this fued — Thus, we must probe staff intensions in an attempt to uncover their vaunted designs, to address a very strange aversion to decent GIF images.

•• The Reason ••

For first-time readers: Many hold animated GIF's in low-esteem due in whole to their uncanny tendency to carry a large file size - though they typically function at low resolutions. Continuing, it is therefore reasonable to prevent thier use, in sake of forum performance.

Alternatively, this burden (that of an..excessive file size) rests only partially on the shoulders of GIF's. And as shown below, nearly unrelated 'formats' share that same drawback; image formats they endorse.

I bestow upon thee a happenstance: Are all GIF's actually that bad? Allow me to compare a close friend to the undesired, heavily detailed GIF:

Quote:

 

(Fenix, basic GIF) 17 layers - 17 kb (165 x 54)


(Lamer, complex GIF) 47 layers - 239 kb (112 x 100)


— A 222 kb difference

To fully grasp the differences between these two images, we must first have a basic understanding of GIF creation:

•• To Create ••

To make an animated GIF you must first take a set number of variable images and stack them multiple times to make a pretty convincing, "moving" image.





Now, the exact size of the resulting GIF is intimately linked with the quality (or the pixel depth) of their original composite images, their quantity - or just how many times we intend to bunch em' all together.

So: If we take 10 basic images (with a low pixel depth) and stack them atop one another then the resulting GIF will have a far less, cumulative file size than if we'd done things differently - though this time with 10 detailed images (with high pixel depth). To further elaborate by way of example:

(Basic GIF)
5 images, 1000 pixels, each 2 KB = 10 KB GIF

(Complex GIF)
5 images, 2000 pixels, each 4 KB = 20 KB GIF

What we can gain from this is that not every GIF is created equally; That there are distinct types of animated GIF's, each individual GIF further divided by their amount of layers: There's a basic type (cartoonish, doesn't have many layers etc) and then there's the heavily detailed type (where the source images are taken from screen captures, have plently of highly pixelated layers... movie-like in presentation?);

•• The Fugitive ••

Are not heavily detailed, numerously layered GIF's our suspect? At a mere 17kb, do basic GIF's truly pose any subtantiative threat to the peace? Ah! You were under the impression that all of em' were resource-munchers, congesting your internet with their bigness! But that is clearly not the case, as once thought.

Before we continue with that, let's discover some stuff.

•• A Discovery •• (WTF)

Considered an 'upstanding' format, the JPG (a file format which consolidates each individual image, compressing them all into a single layer - normally resulting in less file size)
might even contend with our buddy...

Quote:

 

(JPG) - 35 kb (450 x 125)


(Fenix, Basic GIF) - 17 kb (165 x 54)


50% difference in size.

This is by no means a perfect example considering FENIXฎ [GIF] has - arguably - less taxing dimensions than the JPG, even contributing to his rival's confidence by being backgroundless (which doesn't exactly help our case either as Fenixฎ managed to shave some excess kb). Nevertheless, to use him within a signature would obviously result in his expulsion even though he is very similar to the JPG; They both unlike Fenix'sฎ cousin, The Lamer - who is actually quite dangerous.

Regardless, why must we dismiss that both the JPG and particularly, Fenixฎ share download rates?

My apologies, I did not explain myself sufficiently: Why ban something so varied - with such a wide range of sizes, entirely? We know that there are different types of GIF's, some useful and others... not. (Banning both types is like imprisioning a random selection of people, because we Humans all have potential to commit crimes. Though many of us probably haven't truthfully done a thing unlawful.) [url=Good GIF's are most certainly not in short supply]http://s47.photobucket.com/albums/f170/mizzlesunbizzle/?start=0[/url], so... What's the purpose behind it all?

•• Static Formats ••

JPG's, PNG's, etc... also symptomatically suffer from inflation in the way a GIF is similarly affected, though this mainly occurs at lower-ends (EX: You probably won't find a 1MB 450x150 JPG. You would regularly find them at 1000x1000 resolution or higher. GIF's share no such restriction, meaning that smaller images may be freely stacked atop one another quite easily {try bunching a few 500x500 resolution images together}, which would generally result in that GIF reaching a greater weight than that of the JPG).

For clarification purposes I'll change the JPG's file format to PNG (using GIMP with the highest compression possible and with all features enabled):

Quote:

 

(png) - 141 kb (450 x 125) 


It's file size jumped an astonishing 106 kb

Though improper for regular use (the PNG format offers much higher quality at the expense of file size); We see that this specific image (being over 10x larger than Fenixฎ); With it's whopping 141 kb file size, is considered 'safe' here whereas the [1 kb] GIF below would be deleted without hesitation.

Quote:

 

(basic gif) 8 Layers - 1 kb (33 x 35)

If I'm to be mistaken then the process of GIF animation must specifically involve the role of several other factors which I may have missed -- through which you would prove to our guests that the 1 KB GIF above might still severely impact their performance.

No such factor exists.

Cont.

•• Additional Examples ••

Quote:

 

(png) 118 kb - (426 x 150)


(basic gif) 31 kb - (92 x 132)

Cont.

•• Real Solutions ••

Perhaps we're taking this the wrong way? Why not simply allow us to filter out GIF's by themselves?
These methods, funky though they be, may work quite well even without staff involvement.

I wrote a few guides which detail this pheomena below:

Quote:

 

Firefox:

1) Download Adblock

Link

2) Restart Firefox
t%0

little haomaru have been drunk I guess. But the pic is good. :rolleyes: