SummitPost.org

I prefer pictures without frames.

brichardsson wrote:i hate to point out the obvious, but human nature is part of the problem. stop and think for a minute.

Escape fate buddy.

brichardsson wrote:you're a guy. when was the last time you were hanging with your friends, and a girl walked by, and you told your friends, "dude, that chick is so marginal."

I have not once said that in my entire life. I've been around folks who have, but I do my best to look for character in people.

brichardsson wrote:we humans notice and point out the exceptional. it's not a problem, it's just human nature.

Right, with that in mind voting all 10's is not pointing out the exceptional.

mrchad9 wrote:I think if we were designing the system from scratch today photos would have a like/dislike system while the object pages would have the 1-10 or some sort of more detailed voting method.

It's not too late to change. But the question arises, would the community like that change?

@Buz, I may be able to think of something clever for your case. Give me some time to figure it out. If I forget, give me a hollar.

Interestingly, when I go to my collection of photos, they have no frames. If I look at one individually, there's that damn black frame. The caption and check mark don't really need the frame; it's just a question of what is a better look. I vote for no frames; everyone else can voice their opinion as they see fit. Whatever we do, it should be the same everywhere.

Buz Groshong wrote:I prefer pictures without frames.

I like the frames Josh designed, black with round corners.

I'd had the black frame style since the days of SPV2. So what we all see now is the older version. I have a slicker version which might get implemented. Regarding Buz, there are three methods of removing the frames for you. All of these methods would not effect everyone except those interested.

1. I might be able to give you a snippet of code that you could put inside of your browser when visiting summitpost might be able to over write it's CSS to not show frames (this would require investigating).

2. I could make your pages not show frames using a very simple piece of CSS code. But this would involve putting the code on each page and it would only apply to yours.

3. Keep in mind, this is a radical idea and I'm not necessarily proposing it. If preferences come out for SPV4 there could be the possibility of style over ride where you get to select page view (from your profile) in three styles: plain, semi-styled, and well styled.

So those are the only three options I can think of. Most seem to like the new dark grey (it's not black) image box.

Josh Lewis wrote:I'd had the black frame style since the days of SPV2. So what we all see now is the older version. I have a slicker version which might get implemented. Regarding Buz, there are three methods of removing the frames for you. All of these methods would not effect everyone except those interested.

1. I might be able to give you a snippet of code that you could put inside of your browser when visiting summitpost might be able to over write it's CSS to not show frames (this would require investigating).

2. I could make your pages not show frames using a very simple piece of CSS code. But this would involve putting the code on each page and it would only apply to yours.

3. Keep in mind, this is a radical idea and I'm not necessarily proposing it. If preferences come out for SPV4 there could be the possibility of style over ride where you get to select page view (from your profile) in three styles: plain, semi-styled, and well styled.

So those are the only three options I can think of. Most seem to like the new dark grey (it's not black) image box.

Don't go doing anything just for me; it's not worth the effort. 3 does sound interresting, though - if it allows us each to choose how we see pictures rather than how ours are seen. I do prefer that things all look the same, it provides continuity.

Buz Groshong wrote:

Josh Lewis wrote:Most seem to like the new dark grey (it's not black) image box.

Don't go doing anything just for me; it's not worth the effort. 3 does sound interresting, though - if it allows us each to choose how we see pictures rather than how ours are seen. I do prefer that things all look the same, it provides continuity.

+1

I do not like the dark theme. At all. I would be deeply pissed to see that change forced on me.

Like Buz, I do like the option of choosing the way we view things. Continuity is really important to some people, which explains why some of us can't stand the styling on some profile pages and beta pages.

All I want is a user-friendly site with pages that load quickly. I don't need a website that looks like an arcade. Leaving people with options is the best way to go.

Bob Sihler wrote:I do not like the dark theme. At all. I would be deeply pissed to see that change forced on me.

Bob, I have no intentions on that being a forced upon thing. Before I even started making it I knew it wouldn't be a site default but more of a "looks cool, and a neat style". For those interested, they can see the dark theme by looking at my profile (the background on the dark theme uses a gradient dark color instead of an image).

Bob Sihler wrote:Like Buz, I do like the option of choosing the way we view things. Continuity is really important to some people, which explains why some of us can't stand the styling on some profile pages and beta pages.

Thanks for voicing it here. Matt wasn't sure if people were interested in preferences but I'm hearing now quite a few people happy about the idea. If the ability to view pages comes out, the plain view could potentially override the users page styling and make it plain. For example lets say someone has a page with a green table. If a user could choose to have viewing plain it would not only make the image boxes white, but could make the tables white as well. Now I can't guarantee if this feature is even possible but is certainly worth considering.

Bob Sihler wrote:All I want is a user-friendly site with pages that load quickly.

And those are things we all want. The dark frame around each image takes one line of code (background: #444444;) or should I saw two words with a colon and semi colon. I've actually reduced the code since SPV2 when it comes to images. The old method was much clunkier per image which I optimized it to a tableless design. I convinced Matt which he made it in 3 DIV containers but eventually I discovered how to do it in a single one. This is why SP's images were glitched for a very short period of time a little while before the new editor (I felt that it had to be done). The new code was put in place just in time before the new editor came out.

Bob Sihler wrote:I ... need a website that looks like an arcade.

Your wish is my command. I'll make sure Matt makes your profile look like this: