Jump to content
  • 0

Photo in profile web


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 664 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Question

7 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
9 minutes ago, Alyona Su said:

I believe it is 800x800 pixels.

My last photo was taken with a resolution of 1795x2551. So I'm interested to know the maximum allowed resolution so as not to search for it manually.

Edited by Errant1979
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
33 minutes ago, Errant1979 said:

My last photo was taken with a resolution of 1795x2551. So I'm interested to know the maximum allowed resolution so as not to search for it manually.

It will be resized to 800x800 after uploading it. And resized to 512x512 in-world. As for the image file itself, I think the maximum resolution is 1024 (longest side) - could be 20348, but not sure, file size at 1MB. Though it WILL be resized down to 800x800. So if you are playing with it in Affinity Photo or GIMP or something, you may want to resize it down manually.

If you usually export files as PNG - it will be better to save as JPEG at 70% quality for profile images.

Edited by Alyona Su
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

thank you all for your answers. But you misunderstand me. I wasn't talking about the profile picture, I was talking about the web section of the profile. I have a large size photo there. The system does not change their resolution, remains as is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

At Errant's link notice the note at the bottom of the page. The SL system reformats all uploaded images to a size based on 'powers of 2'. e.g., 2, 4, 8,  16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, and 1024 the max size. There is no requirement or re-formatting to square. So, a 512x1024 image is possible.

This means a 300x300 image will not be saved at 300x300 within the SL system. While 256 is the closest size it will require the image be enlarged and most enlargement algorithms are horrible. A 512 image will be downsized. Reduction algorithms are way better than enlargement algorithms. However, there is some debate as to whether and upload via the the web pages has the same restrictions as an upload via the viewers. I think it depends on where the image is stored. As best I can tell that depends on where the images is used. And if used on the web and in-world I suspect it is stored in two places and the in-world version ends up in the SL assets in JPG2000.

Also, all in-world images in SL are forced into the JPG2000 format. That is an interesting format with lots of advantages for real time 3D rendering. Suffice to point out it is a JPEG lossy format. So, uploading JPG or other lossy format images makes for a double loss in quality as image editor to JPG loses and then JPG to JPG2000 loses more, which is why most experienced SL peeps use TGA and PNG as their upload.

The viewer's conversion (or is it the server's - I forget) to JPG2000 sort of sucks when compared to Photoshop and GIMP. So, for best quality images handle your size and image ratios in your image editor then upload. The idea is to avoid triggering any of the SL systems re-formatting so, it just writes your image as uploaded into JPG2000 format.

Some think Photoshop's downsize resample algorithm Bilinear is better than the often recommended BiCubic, for SL use. I think it is a very fine point most won't notice.

RATIO - Then the profile picture has that annoying size ratio issue. See:

...and you thought uploading a profile picture would be simple... 😣

Edited by Nalates Urriah
comment
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 664 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...