At 04:54 PM 3/18/2002 -0500, Sam wrote:
Now that it is apparently okay to post thumbnails for reference, if what I understand is true following Kelley v Ariba that is, can anyone point to an agreed-upon definition of what constitutes a thumbnail image? And I sure hope its not something like 100 x 100, because that's hardly enough to give reference to an eight foot canvas.
That is really the crux of the question. It is not the size of the thumbnail that is significant, but how it addresses the commercial viability of the work being reduced. 100x100 pixels may be enough to create a commercial surrogate if the original work is the size of a postage stamp, while 1000x1000 may be a non-commercial reproduction of a medieval tapestry.
Thumbnails just can't be reduced to a rule of thumb. Robt =========================== Robert A. Baron mailto:[email protected] http://www.pipeline.com/~rabaron/ http://www.studiolo.org --- You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email protected]
