>  Pete,

Why is the pic all fuzzy - whoops, I forgot to put on my specs, ah, 
that's better. Great photo indeed,  came in on full 17" screen. 
Even   with wind up--I mean dial up, it d/led in less than a minute. 
My computer shows it as 616K. What I don't understand is that I have 
other photos pulled off the internet and from my own camera that are 
equally clear and are all  well under  100K and came in much more 
quickly.  Explain!

Geoff

>  > I feel that often a pic is worth a 1000 words
>
>Bert, Tony,
>
>No argument from me there - but the problem is that many folk are new  to
>digital photography, and some don't have a clue how to reduce a 
>photo from  2048
>x 1536 (which is how it comes out of their camera) to the 640 x 480 which  is
>reasonable for a pic here among the text.
>
>I've attached the original of that pic I put in my last post - see how long 
>it takes to download and how big it is on your screen.
>
>I'll take either option - just expressing a personal preference.
>
>Pete
>
>-------------- next part --------------
>A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>Name: P1010009.JPG
>Type: image/jpeg
>Size: 629592 bytes
>Desc: not available
>Url : 
>http://postfix.45mm.com/pipermail/sslivesteam/attachments/20051027/515ab6e6/P1010009.jpe
>_______________________________________________
>SSLiveSteam mailing list
>Send messages: [email protected]
>Cancel subscription: http://postfix.45mm.com/mailman/listinfo/sslivesteam
>Rules: http://www.45mm.com/sslivesteam_guide.html

_______________________________________________
SSLiveSteam mailing list
Send messages: [email protected]
Cancel subscription: http://postfix.45mm.com/mailman/listinfo/sslivesteam
Rules: http://www.45mm.com/sslivesteam_guide.html

Reply via email to