GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Images

Ok, let's talk about image presentation. I think we need to develop a standard for how images are presented on the site. By this, I mean we answer th basic questions:

For each major type of images (i.e. maps, creatures, items, screenshots), what is the standard?
 * Thumbnailed or not?
 * Standard dimensions in an article? (e.g. maps should be 200 pixels wide, characters should be 200 pixels long.)
 * Size of file?
 * Image format? PNG/JPG/GIF/Other?
 * Best practices? (example, for maps: It's best to also fully capture the name of the nearest outpost. For characters: the character should occupy 80% of the height of the screen so that its image is clear and crisp).

--Karlos 05:46, 15 Aug 2005 (EST)

Restarting
It looks like we all forgot about this. I'm bringing up the discussion primarily so that we can settle the issue of brightness and contrast-adjusted screenshots. -- Gordon Ecker 02:55, 21 June 2007 (CDT)
 * In many situations I feel an adjustment to the levels is well-suited. As far as images go, there are some articles that relate exactly to missions and in-game scenarios, such as quest pages and mission pages, and then other articles that are more just generalities, dealing a lot more with lore. In the former, it is perfectly understandable why an image should be preserved with its exact lighting conditions such as when one would need to identify something in-game in its area, IE a trader, collector, etc. For things related much more to storyline and lore, however, these restrictions shouldn't apply. The idea with those pages such as those is to gather as much known information as possible. They're not used for identifying out in a specific area with a certain lighting condition, they're used for general learning and knowledge-building.
 * Where is a spot in-game with good sunlight color? The desert seems too yellow and the Shiverpeaks are too blue. I'd like to help with some images, but I don't want to upload crappy ones. -Valkor the Confused 03:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * As with Image:Abaddon.jpg, his "in-game appearance" is irrelevant. If it the screenshot was located on its mission page, then it'd be fine to show it in the lighting for that mission because people would better identify it. It's not though. The lightened image is able to show much more detail than in the darkened image, something much more advantageous to those who are there for the lore aspect. Just my opinion anyways. =3 --Talonz 19:06, 21 June 2007 (CDT)

GuildWiki Standardimages
Honestly, I'm missing an easy-to-find link to the images Guild Wiki already offers. Like the skills and profession icons. Once I found a page that had an overview of all those (large and small) with filenames but now I can't find it again *cry*. --Birchwooda Treehug 10:56, 9 July 2007 (CDT)
 * Special:Imagelist&mdash; ♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 16:09, 9 July 2007 (CDT)
 * Nah, not that. That shows a lot of useless things and no proper overview at all. --Birchwooda Treehug 14:19, 10 July 2007 (CDT)
 * I dunno about the skill icons, but perhaps you are looking for this - Category:Templates/Profession icons? [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 14:22, 10 July 2007 (CDT)
 * Yes, that looks good. But why is it so oversized? and is there such a thing for skill icons too? Like you can have large icons and small ones. --Birchwooda Treehug 17:46, 10 July 2007 (CDT)
 * Because the thumbnails in image categories are displayed at a fixed size. Large images are shrunk and small images are stretched. -- Gordon Ecker 18:04, 10 July 2007 (CDT)

resolution
1280x1024 is actually a bad resolution because on a 4:3 monitor it doesn't have square pixels. 1280x960 is a resolution with square pixels, screenshots taken at that resolution will show up square at most other common resolutions. 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1152x864, 1280x960, and 1600x1200 are all good for 4:3 monitors, and the "square pixel" setting for your widescreen monitor depends on whether it's a 16:10 or 16:9 model. --◄mendel► 03:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * That's true for CRTs, but many non-widescreen LCD monitors, including mine, actually have a 5:4 ratio, reversing the square/rectangular consideration. 1280x1024 is the most common "native" resolution for these monitors, which produces square pixels, whereas 1280x960 or any of the others in your list would have "wide" rectangular pixels.  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 03:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)