Hey guys, if your shmax signature recently vanished on http://www.tfw2005.com, it was because I inadvertently raised the file size over their 40k limit with my recent changes to reflect the site's new logo. Someone at tfw noticed the change, and went on a bit of a spree yanking sigs, bless their miserly little heart. The good news is I was able to do some optimizations, and the "compact" version of the sig is once again well under 40k.
You can get the bbcode for it here (the last option):
http://www.shmax.com/sig_help
Sorry for the screw-up, folks!
there there... we all make mistakes. You are forgiven. I would say this thread should be front-paged, but I see you changed that section from News to "Photo-of-the-day".
Hey mr 4000 posts, I see you aren't a newbie anymore!
Oh and nice stealth forum change... I don't recall any thread about that. lol 8)
Hey mr 4000 posts, I see you aren't a newbie anymore!
Heh, I never did figure out where "Newbie" was coming from. Now that it's gone, I, I don't know what to do with the rest of my life.
Oh and nice stealth forum change... I don't recall any thread about that. lol 8)
Actually Tripredacus contributed that. :)
Also noticed that we can get to people's collection and wishlist in the forums from links in the author column.
Also noticed that we can get to people's collection and wishlist in the forums from links in the author column.
Nice. Thanks Max.
Hey mr 4000 posts, I see you aren't a newbie anymore!
Heh, I never did figure out where "Newbie" was coming from. Now that it's gone, I, I don't know what to do with the rest of my life.
It may be that you had disabled custom titles that made it become "locked" on newbie for that time. But you can customize the membergroups.
Admin -> Features and Options
Members -> Membergroups
Scroll down and there are 5 default groups with a post count value.
That's where it comes from.
You can turn off the titles for members of certain groups (mods, global mods, and admins only)...I turned it off about a month ago. :)
Overall, though, the titles are based on how many posts you have.
After doing a little research, I just created a new title (User) with a required # of posts of 0...so basically, everyone has been promoted out of the Newbie status and is now a User.
Other titles can be added later on, although I can't imagine anyone clamoring for other titles...so, I just did what needed to be done to remove the "Newbie" status.
Does this work for everyone?
MIKE
engledogg
You can turn off the titles for members of certain groups (mods, global mods, and admins only)...I turned it off about a month ago. :)
Overall, though, the titles are based on how many posts you have.
After doing a little research, I just created a new title (User) with a required # of posts of 0...so basically, everyone has been promoted out of the Newbie status and is now a User.
Other titles can be added later on, although I can't imagine anyone clamoring for other titles...so, I just did what needed to be done to remove the "Newbie" status.
Does this work for everyone?
MIKE
engledogg
Thanks Trip and Ed!
(http://rodale.typepad.com/.a/6a00e54f86af568833012875ad7d21970c-800wi)
Great now I got that song in my head. :o
Apparently a lot of people are still having trouble with tfw. It seems my assumption that most of them were already using the "compact" version was wrong. I'm torn as to what to do, here--I really like the new logo version, but if I keep branching on all the possible variations of the sig (fancy/regular background, full collection tallies/just fun facts, etc) the "Your dynamic signature" page is going to become a mess.
Maybe I should just make a "Build your signature" page where you can choose features to display, pick colors and a background image, and just tune it until it's under whatever size you're looking for. It'll push the toyline expansion back yet again, but I think I could probably bang it out in a few days. Thoughts?
Apparently a lot of people are still having trouble with tfw. It seems my assumption that most of them were already using the "compact" version was wrong. I'm torn as to what to do, here--I really like the new logo version, but if I keep branching on all the possible variations of the sig (fancy/regular background, full collection tallies/just fun facts, etc) the "Your dynamic signature" page is going to become a mess.
Maybe I should just make a "Build your signature" page where you can choose features to display, pick colors and a background image, and just tune it until it's under whatever size you're looking for. It'll push the toyline expansion back yet again, but I think I could probably bang it out in a few days. Thoughts?
Working on this, even though I know I really shouldn't let it distract me from More Important Features. I'm planning on making the following things customizable:
- show collection (y/n)
- show fun facts (y/n)
- show personal message (this is a string of text entered by the user... it can be any length, but longer messages will of course make the image that much larger)
- choose background image (can select one of the stock presets, or upload your own)
- rounded corners (y/n)
You will be able to make multiple signatures (up to some max, such as 3) so you can make a small signature for a site like tfw that has a size limitation, or a large one on a site that doesn't care (like this one). Am I missing anything?
Might I suggest that you eliminate the upload a background picture? Sure it's nice but could become a headache but most importantly, in a word, BRANDING.
I found out about shmax.com from the sig in someones seibertron.com post. And because of that, you've been stuck with me ever since. ;-)
Might I suggest that you eliminate the upload a background picture? Sure it's nice but could become a headache but most importantly, in a word, BRANDING.
I found out about shmax.com from the sig in someones seibertron.com post. And because of that, you've been stuck with me ever since. ;-)
Oh, well the shmax logo would still be stamped over on the left. I figure if people could sort of work their own image into the mix somehow they might be more likely to use the signature.
Now that is not a bad idea at all. Honestly, I just enjoy being able to showcase my collection. However you see fit is good with me.
Might I suggest that you eliminate the upload a background picture? Sure it's nice but could become a headache but most importantly, in a word, BRANDING.
I found out about shmax.com from the sig in someones seibertron.com post. And because of that, you've been stuck with me ever since. ;-)
Oh, well the shmax logo would still be stamped over on the left. I figure if people could sort of work their own image into the mix somehow they might be more likely to use the signature.
Eliminating or minimizing the use of gradients (including drop shadow, emboss width, etc) in the image should bring that size down as well.
Might I suggest that you eliminate the upload a background picture? Sure it's nice but could become a headache but most importantly, in a word, BRANDING.
I found out about shmax.com from the sig in someones seibertron.com post. And because of that, you've been stuck with me ever since. ;-)
Oh, well the shmax logo would still be stamped over on the left. I figure if people could sort of work their own image into the mix somehow they might be more likely to use the signature.
Eliminating or minimizing the use of gradients (including drop shadow, emboss width, etc) in the image should bring that size down as well.
Yep. One of the stock backgrounds will be Boring Grey.
Here's sort of a proof of concept, with all of the elements (logo, text, bg image, rounded corners) being layered together procedurally:
Neat.
MIKE
engledogg
I was looking at my flash sig and in fun facts the know mold completion shows twice.
I was looking at my flash sig and in fun facts the know mold completion shows twice.
Same here.
MIKE
engledogg
I was looking at my flash sig and in fun facts the know mold completion shows twice.
Good eye! Thanks for the catch--I removed the duplicate line. Please be sure to post stuff like this in the bugs forum.
Still seeing the "engledogg owns % of all known Transformers figures." line twice.
MIKE
engledogg
Fixed, thanks Ed.
I got data-driven text colors working:
Still working away on it. I have the first pieces of a front end starting to come together, but I realized that my widget code is a complete nightmare, and am indulging myself in one of my bi-yearly refactoring throw-downs. Standby...
Just a quick progress update: my big code refactor is done, and I've got everything working except for the image upload functionality, which is next. More soon...
Thanks for the update :)
Done! I'll still need a few days to mop up bugs and test stuff, but the new sig-maker thingy is done. Here's one I made just now using the tool:
Done! I'll still need a few days to mop up bugs and test stuff, but the new sig-maker thingy is done. Here's one I made just now using the tool:
Well, not as done this morning--I've decided to implement a cropping/positioning control so you don't have to involve photoshop when uploading an image if you don't want to. Few more days...
Done! I'll still need a few days to mop up bugs and test stuff, but the new sig-maker thingy is done. Here's one I made just now using the tool:
Well, not as done this morning--I've decided to implement a cropping/positioning control so you don't have to involve photoshop when uploading an image if you don't want to. Few more days...
The cropping widget UI is done! It's... *sniff* ... beautiful. Still a bit to do before I can check in, but I think the worst is over.
Allllmost done, folks. Sorry for the long delay (I've had a house guest--my friend Rika-chan from Japan, who brought some cap-bots back for me), but I've got the front and back end for this feature humming away. It will still take a few days to clean up bugs and compile the javascript, but then we will all reach Gif Glory. Hang in there...
Bugs fixed. Javascript compiled. Sleep deprived. Tomorrow is cross-browser testing, and then we should be groovy to go.
Great, I have an idea for my first one. ;D
Great, I have an idea for my first one. ;D
Awesome. I was thinking of starting a thread or something where we can all share our creations. By the way, the first non-chrome browser I tried this in choked: Firefox, for the fail! It may be a few days, yet...
Great, I have an idea for my first one. ;D
Awesome. I was thinking of starting a thread or something where we can all share our creations. By the way, the first non-chrome browser I tried this in choked: Firefox, for the fail! It may be a few days, yet...
<--- thinking to himself - thankfully he didn't try Opera first ;)
Great, I have an idea for my first one. ;D
Awesome. I was thinking of starting a thread or something where we can all share our creations. By the way, the first non-chrome browser I tried this in choked: Firefox, for the fail! It may be a few days, yet...
<--- thinking to himself - thankfully he didn't try Opera first ;)
Lol! You have had a lot of fun with Opera issues haven't you? I'm sorry but, I just couldn't help but laugh when I read your post Wajo.
Good luck Shmax, I hope things pan out soon. Can I ask if there are any specs available so maybe we can start working on our graphics so we'll be ready to go as soon as you are?
Also I have a question kind of related to the subject. Does Opera for Windows process and render the same as Opera for Mac and Opera for Linux? I'd like to think it'd be the same but I've been computing for far to long to know better than to make assumptions about such matters. Also I am not an Apple guy beyond Beatles records so I really don't know much about them aside from the fact that the OSes seem to be proprietary versions of UN/LINux. That's an assumption based on any of the investigating of OS X. It seemed structured the same as the *ux family. Sorry, got off track but, Does Opera render the same on different OSes?
Great, I have an idea for my first one. ;D
Awesome. I was thinking of starting a thread or something where we can all share our creations. By the way, the first non-chrome browser I tried this in choked: Firefox, for the fail! It may be a few days, yet...
<--- thinking to himself - thankfully he didn't try Opera first ;)
Lol! You have had a lot of fun with Opera issues haven't you? I'm sorry but, I just couldn't help but laugh when I read your post Wajo.
Good luck Shmax, I hope things pan out soon. Can I ask if there are any specs available so maybe we can start working on our graphics so we'll be ready to go as soon as you are?
Also I have a question kind of related to the subject. Does Opera for Windows process and render the same as Opera for Mac and Opera for Linux? I'd like to think it'd be the same but I've been computing for far to long to know better than to make assumptions about such matters. Also I am not an Apple guy beyond Beatles records so I really don't know much about them aside from the fact that the OSes seem to be proprietary versions of UN/LINux. That's an assumption based on any of the investigating of OS X. It seemed structured the same as the *ux family. Sorry, got off track but, Does Opera render the same on different OSes?
No idea. But if you are really interested, you can post on their forums: http://my.opera.com/community/forums/tgr.dml?id=2
Can I ask if there are any specs available so maybe we can start working on our graphics so we'll be ready to go as soon as you are?
No specs, you just pick any image you like and upload the sucker. Ideally it will be at least 500 x 160, but even if it isn't the tool won't complain.
Also I have a question kind of related to the subject. Does Opera for Windows process and render the same as Opera for Mac and Opera for Linux?
I don't know either, but with the possible exception of things like scroll bars and other little features that are normally left up to the OS to implement, I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't.
The final score!
Opera: 1 bug (can't write to value for dynamically created input elements)
Firefox: 1 bug (can't dispatch MouseEvent clicks to file input element)
I was able to work around both issues fairly painlessly.
I didn't even bother trying IE9--I don't have it, and I know it's not gonna work.
Will do a little more testing tomorrow, and check-in on Friday.
Thanks Shmax, 500x160 is the info that I was looking for. Now will we have to make our images in .gif format or will the tool convert our images to .gif? Good luck once again. Can't wait to see the finished product :)
Thanks Shmax, 500x160 is the info that I was looking for. Now will we have to make our images in .gif format or will the tool convert our images to .gif? Good luck once again. Can't wait to see the finished product :)
Any format should work. So far I've tried jpg, png, gif, and bmp.
I was able to test in IE9; actually, everything works except for the image upload part, and I'm now showing a popup informing the user that he has made a poor life/browser choice when he clicks the button, thus solving the problem
(http://i.imgur.com/gHcGr.jpg)
IE9? That's so last year. What about IE10? ;D
What about IE10? ;D
It works just fine without complaint, so there must be some mistake. Will troubleshoot later...
Fixed another round of bugs last night--still one to go.
I'm guessing Shmax is tweaking the signatures now. I was gonna report a bug about my sig not showing but it appears there's issues on the Dynamic Signature page as well.
Maybe he's updating now.
I'm guessing Shmax is tweaking the signatures now. I was gonna report a bug about my sig not showing but it appears there's issues on the Dynamic Signature page as well.
Maybe he's updating now.
Yep, I just launched the new build-a-sig feature, and there were a few bumps in the road. All should be well, now...