A few kb's makes little difference. Once the forum grows enough for those few kb's ( multiplied by thousands if we get thousands of members ) to be a problem, we are going to need more bandwidth, more webspace and therefore better hosting or self hosting etc, anyway.With respect to png vs gif, I beg to differ. DTSM is correct. Animated gif files are larger because they are composed of multiple images. Compression certainly reduces the size of .png files, as does optimising .gif files. If you compress an image to 10% of its original size, you'll get something 10% of the original size. If you optimise the multiple images in a .gif file to 10% of their original sizes, you will get a file 10% of the combined total of those images, so of course .png files are going to be smaller if all other factors are equal.DTSM's gif did not work because the system reduced the physical size of his file to match the 65x65 pixel constraints on the physical size of the file. In the process, it also converted the file to .png, thus losing the animation. It now works because the constraints have been changed to 100x100 pixels, enabling his gif to meet the constraints, so the system has not resized it and not converted it to a png.
Mitz from Tips4pc