Willie Wonka wrote:
> ..., coz you dont know who you are more mad at, the idiot on the road who
> almost killed you (RI is well documented as the state with worst drivers in
> the country), or the stupid horn...
>
> Here is a picture of Waggie with his guts out:
> http://s77.photobucket.com/albums/j54/alienspecimen/VW/
>
So how or why, is a snap of your poor injured car 2.7 megabytes? I'm out
at the end of the DSL range. At 768k, it was painfully slow to appear.
I don't think web images generally need to be 16-bit and uncompressed.
The browsers just throw away the extra bits for display. Even highest
quality JPEG, which amounts to lossless compression, is only 700k. I
post my best images at PS's JPEG level seven, 'cause try as I might, I
cann't see a difference between that and higher settings. At that, your
image would be 131k, load in a flash, and look the same in a browser.
Just a thought.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|