Forum:Set standards for images of customizable items

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Set standards for images of customizable items
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 20 August 2012 by Thebrains222.

Currently, in RS:IMP, there are no set standards regarding customizable items such as Herald Capes. This has, in my opinion, become a problem in places like here and here. Now, this is a good-faithed attempt by the user at displaying the item in the several different ways that it can exist, but this is simply not practical. It adds far too much work in managing, maintaining, and updating the images of this single set of items. Just adding transparency to the images in my examples alone is at least an hour or two of cropping in Photoshop (if you're me, at least, I sort of take my time to assure that the image doesn't lose its original shape.)

Now, the actual colors used come into question, as well. In the example of the ceremonial dragon clothing, there are 15 colors shown. Even in RuneScape's simple color selection tool, there are thousands, if not millions of different colors that these items can use. I don't know if it uses the hexadecimal color system, but if it does, that means there's 16.7 million different possible colors. Not to mention items with even more options, like the different patterns available for Herald capes.

To circumvent the overload of images and standardize them, I propose that we add the following subsection to the "Content" section of the image and media policy:

Cutomisable Items

Images of items and equipment with a great number customisable cosmetic properties should only display the item in its default state. Having multiple images of the same item increases the pageload and inflates the amount of work maintaining, managing, and updating the images. Taking a picture of the cutomisation interface is a superior option. Images of items with very few customization options, such items that can be "loyally recoloured," thus having only four variations, may be displayed.


Support - As proposer. — Enigma 01:47, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

Weak Oppose - In the examples of the SoF cosmetic costumes, and indeed for the Wicked robes, I believe that having the limited variance of available colours is a nice addition. For something like the Completionist cape having all colour options is impossible, but when it comes to costumes with a relatively small amount of colour variations, another example might be loyalty costumes, there isn't a huge amount of extra effort required to obtain the extra images. I'd like to hope we have the most comprehensive guide to equipment on the internet, so why can't this be included? We do plenty of other stuff that just creates more work for ourselves and this is relatively minor. cqm 02:22,5/7/2012 (UTC) (UTC)

Support - The mentioned examples and Wicked Robes drive me quite crazy indeed, but different coloured images of items that can be "loyally" recoloured, thus having four variations, should just stay, as they are in little number. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 05:22, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

Amendment - I have clarified the part of my proposal mentioned by Fswe. — Enigma 21:44, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

Also applies for items like the flaming skull, of course. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 16:32, July 6, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose..ish.. but kind of support - For items with hundreds of color options from a color palette like the completionist cape, obviously we should only use the default colors. But, for things like the new wicked cape recolors (16)... Perhaps we should draw a line somewhere, maybe at an item with like 20 recolors, or just UCS. If page load is an issue, they can be moved to a subpage gallery if someone wants to take the time to take nice pics of all the color options. So I guess this is more of a comment: We should either determine with UCS and image maker availability or have a set number. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 21:56, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

How about limiting the number of images that can be put on a page without creating a gallery for them? Drawing the line at 10 seems a reasonable place to start having a subpage if loading time is an issue here, although not the only one. cqm 03:05,6/7/2012 (UTC) (UTC)
Agreed. Subpages should work out fine, or maybe collapsible galleries if it's around 15 images, which is still a lot, but not a humongous super amount. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 16:32, July 6, 2012 (UTC)
A simple collapsible gallery wouldn't help with the page load. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 22:27, July 6, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - I support having pictures of all different colour options if the total number of colour options available is smaller or equal to, say, 15. Maybe 20. If there's more than that, then just have one or a couple images. Matt (t) 03:09, July 6, 2012 (UTC)

Support - I agree with the principle behind this proposal, but I think that the appearance of the image galleries on the articles itself and pageload times are better indicators of the amount of images for the above examples with 16 variations. 222 talk 10:33, July 20, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - Forum:Condensing_Infoboxes_with_Switch_Template; I'm not sure how this template would be able to handle image load, but if it passes, it may be the answer to this problem. MolMan 01:30, July 22, 2012 (UTC)

A bonus infobox with 4x4 buttons with colours above it doesn't make me rub my hands... =/ User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 06:50, July 22, 2012 (UTC)

Support - I agree the switchfo box isn't the best idea; if we don't have it (actually even if we do), we do need some kind of limit. MolMan 16:46, July 22, 2012 (UTC)

Support - Except when the number of colour customisations is infinite (max/comp capes, herald capes, clan cloak motif customisation etc.), or when it's finite but more than it'd be worth taking images for.

 a proofreader ▸ 

19:13, July 22, 2012 (UTC)

Support - I support the policy addition, though I do agree with Mol that if there was some way to make the switch template work, I'd also support that. Blaze_fire.png12.png 01:07, July 23, 2012 (UTC)

Mild support - For only when there's LOADS of colour customisations possible. I'd say more than five. Neitiznot  Choose OptionMy userpage Talk to me! Spam goes here Sign here! 17:40, July 28, 2012 (UTC)

LOADS = more than five is what you're saying? What about wicked robes, queens guard, etc? MolMan 17:45, July 28, 2012 (UTC)
I didn't mean it like that Lol but I do think that about 5 colour changes should be a limit. Neitiznot  Choose OptionMy userpage Talk to me! Spam goes here Sign here! 17:50, July 28, 2012 (UTC)

Support - Yeah the transparency will take a lot of effort and maintaining it will take more effort. I think the loyalty costumes only have five which is acceptable. --Recent uploads SpineTalkGuest book 20:27, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

Closed - Proposed clause will be added to the policy. 222 talk 09:24, August 20, 2012 (UTC)