On 4/4/07, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I should have added to my post that given the current > near-impossibility of providing the optimum size of photograph, you > have to compromise. The trade-offs are between showing the fine detail > as best you can, and showing the whole picture at the expense of fine > detail. Most people prefer to show the whole picture at the expense of > fine detail, and most audiences seem to prefer it. > However, if somebody (JCO for example) in some circumstances wants to > trade the full-picture view then it's his choice and everyone should > get off his back about it. The problem with the example given is that it was a clumsy tradeoff that fulfilled neither criteria. The images were too large to comfortably fit most browsers, based on what I read onlist, but not large enough to show any fine detail, from what I saw when I looked at a random sampling of the pictures presented. No one would be on anyones back if someone would figure out that the my way or the highway mentality doesn't work on this forum, that there are a couple of dozen regular posters here that know a shitload more than he does, and that he could just quietly take constructive advice rather than go off on a bombastic man-child tantrum. -- William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
