which one

[insename2]

which should i use? (i know they both suck, me= not good at ps)

1)

or

2)



3)

 

[wedi42]

you know you can't have pictures in your sig here right?

 

[insename2]

i know... 4 other forums...

 

[notfred]

They're both big and annoying, and those types of crappy signatures are the reason that they're not allowed here.

 

[insename2]

Originally posted by: notfred
They're both big and annoying, and those types of crappy signatures are the reason that they're not allowed here.

okay... so no animation and better design? and what size would u suggest for a signature?

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: insename2

Originally posted by: notfred
They're both big and annoying, and those types of crappy signatures are the reason that they're not allowed here.

okay... so no animation and better design? and what size would u suggest for a signature?

The one you have here is pretty good.

 

[wedi42]

Originally posted by: insename2

Originally posted by: notfred
They're both big and annoying, and those types of crappy signatures are the reason that they're not allowed here.

okay... so no animation and better design? and what size would u suggest for a signature?

none of the above,
i really don't understand the point of a graphic sig

 

[insename2]

you've never had a graphic signature?

 

[QED]

I vote for option #3... no sig is way better than any animated gif sig.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: insename2

Originally posted by: notfred
They're both big and annoying, and those types of crappy signatures are the reason that they're not allowed here.

okay... so no animation and better design? and what size would u suggest for a signature?

two or three lines of text.

Thank you ATF for not allowing annoying graphic signatures.