>>4161654you can double the pixel count of the pseudo-rules now. most people have DSL at least and HD/UHD monitors. 1000xXXX can be obnoxiously small a lot of screens these days, especially retina/4k displays, and shrinking pictures generally looks nicer than blowing them up. it's not a dick move unless you post 10mp, 4mb. or 6000px images. that shit takes a few seconds to render and is too big for most good screens people actually use.
the anon who wrote the sticky and wiki lived on welfare and had some sort of grudge against anyone with nicer stuff than him. he wanted to make a rule that would make gear not matter. it was more his insecurity than anything. he was always getting into arguments about gear, specifically nicer gear than he had. that rule would make files on /p/ smaller than smug anime faces on /v/. oh and he still posts here, being angry at anyone with a nicer camera. anti-gearfag gearfag threads are often his. what good is not liking gearfaggotry, when you engage in it?
it shouldn't matter anyways because unless you have a broken, sludge-covered camera with a lens made from salvaged parts every camera made since 2005 has too much resolution for a good looking 2000xXXXX image. that is less than 3 megapixels. and most people appreciate seeing optical and digital flaws anyways. they might not want to be forced to photograph with them but no one cares if you use them.
