I can't speak with too much authority here, but I can say that the background images like these get auto-scaled, so the size probably doesn't matter too much (within reason*). Maybe it's better to focus on the aspect ratio? If so, would 4:3 be the best? Or something like 16:9, but make it croppable to 4:3, so put nothing important on the sides.LordBob wrote:While we're at it, I'd like to define a set of standard sizes (more like, min/max height/width) that will allow future contributors to account for the very problems we're discussing.
Also, 1280x1024 is 4:5, which has never been a common ratio. While I'm sure there are still a lot of 4:3 monitors out there, 16:9 is now standard for new monitors.
thespaceinvader wrote:Aiming for the widest standard resolution seems sensible. We can always add letterboxing, but we can't take it away as easily.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest