In a message dated 12/19/2007 9:34:11 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Marnie, the thumbnails are huge too. Just hogging bandwidth for something which should just make you think it might be worthwhile to download the actual image. It's like embedding a PSD or uncompressed Tiff file, in a web page, or even using a full size jpeg for the thumbnail, sure the full size image loads instantly when you click on it, but it defeats most of the purpose to using a thumbnail, without that advantage.
=========== Uh huh. Well, I hadn't read the whole thread yet either when I made that comment. Like most of us try to help others with their web pages, when the format is a deterrent for viewing photos. And most of us also listen to such feedback because we want our photos viewed. That seems not to be the case here. ;-) I make my own thumbnails 80x120, low res, forget what res but low res. So they will load quick. Marnie aka Doe --------------------------------------------- Warning: I am now filtering my email, so you may be censored. **************************************See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
