So are we cool with 640 x 480 then?
> -----Original Message----- > From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Garfield > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:55 PM > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Blip JPEGs > > got it, thanks! > > On Jan 11, 2007, at 12:58 PM, Bill Cammack wrote: > > > It seems that he's saying that files that are too big are > downsized... > > not files that are 320x240 will be translated to a larger > size. All > > you would have to do is submit your thumbnails at your desired size. > > > > -- > > Bill C. > > http://ReelSolid.TV > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > >> > >> Sounds big, but that's just me. > >> > >> I'd like 320x240 since I have a narrow main column. > >> > >> Can this be an option for people? > >> > >> On Jan 11, 2007, at 12:34 PM, Mike Hudack wrote: > >> > >>> The code itself is working okay, but it looks like our > configuration > >>> settings could use some tweaks. How does 640 x 480 sound > as a new > >>> max size / resize target? > >> > >> -- > >> Steve Garfield > >> http://SteveGarfield.com > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > -- > Steve Garfield > http://SteveGarfield.com > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
