Is there a possible way to increase the file size maximum and/or the 500x 500-pixel limit for profile pictures, and if not, can I have an explanation why?

probably not, they're usually shown quite small, and not really important. Besides, you can get a lot of detail into a pfp.

If you upload your PFP as an animated WebP image it will increase the quality for some reason

GIitchInTheMatrix wrote:

probably not, they're usually shown quite small, and not really important. Besides, you can get a lot of detail into a pfp.

yes, but the quality is insanely low, and is hard to see, most of the time, if the Picture has any text.

An0therRand0mC0der wrote:

If you upload your PFP as an animated WebP image it will increase the quality for some reason

hm…that's odd. I normally use gif files, whenever I want to have an animated Profile Picture.

Profile pictures are always 90*90 pixels or smaller, so there's really no reason to have one any larger. All that would do is just unnecessarily waste space.

SavetheAtlantic wrote:

Profile pictures are always 90*90 pixels or smaller, so there's really no reason to have one any larger. All that would do is just unnecessarily waste space.

it would increase image quality though, right?

Nate4893 wrote:

SavetheAtlantic wrote:

Profile pictures are always 90*90 pixels or smaller, so there's really no reason to have one any larger. All that would do is just unnecessarily waste space.

it would increase image quality though, right?

No. Why would it? The image has to be shrunk down to fit anyway.

SavetheAtlantic wrote:

Nate4893 wrote:

SavetheAtlantic wrote:

Profile pictures are always 90*90 pixels or smaller, so there's really no reason to have one any larger. All that would do is just unnecessarily waste space.

it would increase image quality though, right?

No. Why would it? The image has to be shrunk down to fit anyway.

yes, it does, but you're saying all pictures have to be shrunk down to fit 90 by 90 pixels, regardless of the fact that they could be 500 by 500?

Nate4893 wrote:

SavetheAtlantic wrote:

Nate4893 wrote:

SavetheAtlantic wrote:

Profile pictures are always 90*90 pixels or smaller, so there's really no reason to have one any larger. All that would do is just unnecessarily waste space.

it would increase image quality though, right?

No. Why would it? The image has to be shrunk down to fit anyway.

yes, it does, but you're saying all pictures have to be shrunk down to fit 90 by 90 pixels, regardless of the fact that they could be 500 by 500?

500*500 is way too big and would fill up half of the screen. The size of a profile picture in the forums is 90*90, the largest that they are displayed as. Usually they're even smaller at 60*60, and the one in the navbar is 32*32. Increasing the size does nothing.

SavetheAtlantic wrote:

Nate4893 wrote:

SavetheAtlantic wrote:

Nate4893 wrote:

SavetheAtlantic wrote:

Profile pictures are always 90*90 pixels or smaller, so there's really no reason to have one any larger. All that would do is just unnecessarily waste space.

it would increase image quality though, right?

No. Why would it? The image has to be shrunk down to fit anyway.

yes, it does, but you're saying all pictures have to be shrunk down to fit 90 by 90 pixels, regardless of the fact that they could be 500 by 500?

500*500 is way too big and would fill up half of the screen. The size of a profile picture in the forums is 90*90, the largest that they are displayed as. Usually they're even smaller at 60*60, and the one in the navbar is 32*32. Increasing the size does nothing.

ok, thanks for confirming this.