Thread:ARTaylor/@comment-47881-20120902172219/@comment-122823-20120904033231

It's true I've been overzealous with images. I need to control myself in the future.

The problem with captions, as I said, is consistency. They're all over the place. Do you make a joke that others may not understand? Do you say the same information that's a couple of pixels to the left/right? A lot of times it seems they're saying something just to say something. When I started going to the Mass Effect Wiki, I saw that they don't have thumbnails or captions. I used it for DLC guides and got through fine without captions.

Television images seem fine shrunken down. Most TV deals with bright colors meant for smaller screens. But the videos are able to go down to darker colors. and have dark images that look like nothing at 175px. They look fine full sized and 250px when I've previewed them. But as they are now, they're nothing but near-surreal blobs. There's nothing particularly interesting or inviting about an image that cannot be understood.

I don't want the small image on the page to be incomprehensible. I don't want people to have to open a pop-up window or new window/tab just to understand an image. To me, that interferes with the flow of reading. Like Googling something when reading a book. As a reader, I'd rather just offer a quick glance to the image to understand it then get right back to reading. I don't want to stop and try to figure out what it is or wait for a page to load.

A more suitable comparison of image size and captions would be and. In my opinion the larger captionless images work just fine.

I'd like some outside viewpoints before we decide on something.