huh? I bought my video card for $35 new and got the Sony 19" CRT monitor for $135 new old stock on ebay. This stuff THAT I USE isn't state of the art or expensive, your stuff is just very out of date. I suggest you upgrade to higher resolution if you are into digital photography as its NOT expensive to go to 1600x1200 today by any standards, especially if you compare to the cost of digital SLRs and lenses, etc. I cant recommend it high enough, especially if you are still using 1280x960 or less, as it really makes a big difference in viewing and editing photos....
The reason I dont post the photos any smaller than 1200 pixels wide is I DONT LIKE THE WAY THEY LOOK reduced any smaller. Thats not "elitest", thats called artistic integrity. ( although these particualar phots are more documentary than artistic, they still benefit from a minimum image quality to be appreciated IMHO). jco -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Celio Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 12:39 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Web Gallery :Barrett-JacksonCollectorCarAuctions2007WestPalmBeach... JCO wrote: >I guess I didnt make this clear enough, I dont > do "lowest common denominator" web photos, if your > screen cant show them fully as I want them to be seen, > then you simply dont GET to see them. Even reducing > them to 800 pixels wide "ruins" them IHMO. Don't you think that's being rather elitist? Hell, why share photos at all if the only people who can view them are those with large and expensive monitor setups like yours? If this is how you always operate, I don't think I'll bother viewing your photos, even though, as I said, the ones I looked at were very nice. John -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
