Could you possibly increase the avatar size to 150x150? or if not that, then possibly make them around 20k instead of 10k?

No.

If you need to work with resizing images, Infranview has some basic type conversion features. Just go to www.irfanview.com/

To elaborate on Thyla's extensive post, this is actually an upgrade. We used to have smaller avatars, but then we traded up about... what, 2-3 years ago? This is how the forums come. Use K_bob's link to make an avatar fit nicer. Or go check out the couple of avatar threads in Important Threads at the top of the Home Forum page.

its not the size that is the problem, i can make it 100x100 and it will look fine. its simply clicking a button on Photoshop. Its the fact that what i do requires more space.

such as this set:

Well, either adapt your art style to the size we use, or you can request an avatar at the place I mentioned before. Changing the size isn't just an admin clicking a button, there's a lot of stuff that needs to go on, plus massive avatars can mess with page sizes, yadda yadda yadda.

You see where I'm going with this?

(Those are spiffy, by the way!)

thanks, but it isnt the physical size. its the memory size. its just too complex of a sig to make smaller. it would literally have to be 10x10 to fit into the 10kb area

Still, we can't simply alter the memory size with a click of a button. Plus, larger sizes mean slower load times for those on dail-up. No, the 100x100 at 10kb is going to stay like this for a while. Sorry!

Slight correction: the actual implementation of the decision to go to larger avatars would in fact take just a click of a button.

However, the reason I hold the avatar sizes to where they are is that:

1. People come here to listen to what you have to say much more than to look at pretty avatars. We don't want the avatars overwhelming the content.

2. 100x100 px is becoming something of a standard for avatar sizes, and we'd like to go with that.

3. By doubling allowable image sizes, we bring a significant impact to not only page load speeds for users on low bandwidth connections, but also to our own bandwidth usage (something we pay for.)

So, to bring us full circle to my original post on the matter:

No.

That square image, reduced to 100x100 pixels takes up 3.7kiB at a fairly mild level of compression, and fairly minimal loss of detail.

I remember when it was increased to 100x100! It was Sept. 11, 2002.

Yay for good memory!

Wow...

Agreed.... Wow...

Dang, Axel beat me to the punch with the Avatar Edit :)

But hounestly, Any square Avatar of good size can easily be reduced to under 10k

be happy with this size. most boards I post on limit avs, if they even allow them at all, to 64x64.