chiisana said: This is not absurdres by a far fetch.
Like it or not, there are still folks running 1024x768. I'd personally like to think that highres would be big enough to fit my 2960x1050 res dual-monitors, but then again, some people only own a netbook...
tertiumsquid said: Like it or not, there are still folks running 1024x768.
That's not the point. We have an actual absurdres tag that is explicitly defined as: "An image with this tag should be at least 3200 pixels wide or 2400 pixels tall."
jxh2154 said: That's not the point. We have an actual absurdres tag that is explicitly defined as: "An image with this tag should be at least 3200 pixels wide or 2400 pixels tall."
Not quite what I meant. I was pointing out that some people consider a 1mp image to be high resolution. I wasn't complaining that this should be considered absurdres.
