Well large solid color spaces surrounded by text will show show a bit of artifacting at level 5, but for most photos 5 or 6 is fine. Besides you can always bump it up if you need better quality. Either way they are way faster than using BMPS, at least on my system.
On 11/9/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > sez [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > Try using a JPEG, they are much smaller - that same routine runs in 91 > >milliseconds when using a JPEG set at quality level 10 in Photoshop > (which > >is nearly loseless). In fact for on-screen use you can save a JPEG down > >to about 5 in Photoshop without any serious degradation in quality. > Maybe. It *strongly* depends on exactly what's *in* the image you're > working with. You should always have the "Preview" checkbox checked when > you save > an image as JPEG, so you can see for yourself how badly your image gets > distorted as you reduce the quality level. > In addition, you might want to consider Photoshop's Save As Web function, > which gives you fine-grained control over various adjustments, lets you > reduce > the filesize down to pretty much any arbitrary figure, and also lets you > compare the untouched image to 1-3 different versions with different sets > of > adjustments. Me, I use Save As Web religiously for all the graphics in my > fantasy-and-science-fiction webzines TSAT (http://tsat.transform.to or > http://tsat.xepher.net) and ANTHRO (http://anthrozine.com). > _______________________________________________ > use-revolution mailing list > [email protected] > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your > subscription preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution > _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
