next »

[Geti]

Any reason the forum is now super wide on widescreen monitors? Text with a high number of words per line is quite hard to read, if the intention is to make it more usable on 1080p and higher monitors it'd be great if the default zoom was a bit higher (or the font sizes increased with horizontal width). I didn't mind the old predictable size though; made for easy rules like setting width=700 for images you didn't want accompanied by a scrollbar.

[Captain Uzi]

Any reason the forum is now super wide on widescreen monitors? Text with a high number of words per line is quite hard to read, if the intention is to make it more usable on 1080p and higher monitors it'd be great if the default zoom was a bit higher (or the font sizes increased with horizontal width). I didn't mind the old predictable size though; made for easy rules like setting width=700 for images you didn't want accompanied by a scrollbar.

Wondering this too, it looks weird on my widescreen monitor now and kinda hurts my eyes.

[Impmaster]

It looks weird on my laptop as well. That's like 720p.

[ThemsAllTook]

I preferred the old width too. Wide blocks of text are uncomfortable to read.

[Uykered]

Ya especially on 2560 and 4k width...

[Derek]

Split into a new thread, because it deserves it and also because this is an admin issue rather than a moderator one.

I changed this because of the number of large screenshots that were getting scrollbar'd, especially on the DevLogs.

Maybe I should set a max width, though? What would be the ideal size for that (previous width was 900px)?

[eigenbom]

Argh so wide! I preferred the old fixed width, or maybe I just got used to it.

[Blademasterbobo]

could the text / picture size be different values? if no then 900px.

[Schoq]

Make posts expand for images or auto size them down or something. anything but three dozen words on a line

Just google optimal column width or something and see that everyone in the world agrees this is hella uncomfortable

[Geti]

Fwiw polycount.com forums handle large images quite well - shrinks them down into a fixed width, with a "click here to expand this" bar at the top, (like [img=http://grab.by/yxoI]http://so[/img]) which I imagine you could probably do entirely in css these days, but otherwise with a tiny script.

[FARTRON]

The problem isn't px it's em. The longer the lines of text the more strain on the eye to find its place. More px is fine if font size is increased proportionately.

[Sik]

Actually, I took a quick look at the stylesheet and the problem is px - all the font-size parameters are measured in pixels (save a couple whose value is "100%"). If the values were measured in em or rem, it would be less of an issue (and images get measured in pixels by default anyway). This assumes browsers have larger sizes on em on larger resolutions, I don't know if that's the case.

Also the image issue could be solved with CSS using something like this:

Code:

img { max-width: 100%; }

That ensures images can't be larger than the width of the container (smaller images will be left untouched). Make sure to not assign the height though if you want to keep the proportions.

[Ant]

ew pls change forum back

[Armageddon]

I can't read anything.

[medieval]

complainy pants. its not half bad.

[Irock]

It was kinda unusable yesterday without a max-width, but now it's great.

I'd recommend making the user info area (the part with the avatar and stuff) a fixed pixel width rather than percentage based. Seems much too large now.

[Armageddon]

complainy pants. its not half bad.

Not half bad. But it could be perfect.

[Derek]

It was kinda unusable yesterday without a max-width, but now it's great.

I'd recommend making the user info area (the part with the avatar and stuff) a fixed pixel width rather than percentage based. Seems much too large now.

Cool! Yeah, now it's 770px-1100px, so the site should look better on low res screens but you should also be able to see more of big images when you're wide (without it getting stretched too big).

Regarding the user info area, what's the best way to combine pixel and percentage?

Also the image issue could be solved with CSS using something like this:

Code:

img { max-width: 100%; }

That ensures images can't be larger than the width of the container (smaller images will be left untouched). Make sure to not assign the height though if you want to keep the proportions.

So what I opted to do was make it so that when you click and hold on an image in a post (img:active), it will set this property, making the image fully visible. Ideally, you'd just click once and it would toggle (Polycount style), but I'm not sure how to accomplish that in css.

You can test it on this image once it goes live after a few hours (there's a lag between me saving the change and it going live):



Image taken from the Ultima Ratio Regum devlog.

[Irock]

It was kinda unusable yesterday without a max-width, but now it's great.

I'd recommend making the user info area (the part with the avatar and stuff) a fixed pixel width rather than percentage based. Seems much too large now.

Cool! Yeah, now it's 770px-1100px, so the site should look better on low res screens but you should also be able to see more of big images when you're wide (without it getting stretched too big).

Regarding the user info area, what's the best way to combine pixel and percentage?

I don't have a ton of experience with tables, but I think you should be able to define the width of the left column (the user area) in pixels, remove the width definition for the right column (the post area) and it'll properly expand to fit the table width.

[Geti]

So what I opted to do was make it so that when you click and hold on an image in a post (img:active), it will set this property, making the image fully visible.

I feel like this would be better in reverse (so you click to see detail, and see an overview otherwise), but either way it's a good way of handling it. If you can pull the image to the front when clicked as well that could be ever better, I can't rememeber how easy that stuff is though.