Ken wrote:
> 
> Spider wrote:
> >
> > A point about PNG ...
> > I've had some vary funny filesizes concerning a reasonably compressed jpeg, and a
high
> > compressed PNG.... PNG may be smaller... it all depends on the scene ...
> > :-)
> >
> > As for the 640*480, I feel it's too much of a "in-between" to use now... Sowwy...
> >
> > //Spider
> 
> I'm sorry but you are going to have to validate that statement.
> 
> Would you care to elaborate a bit more ?
Why not, I've been rambeling all day on varholm... <--- Side note, I'm rambling !

What I meant is that I don't think that 640x480 is very representative, since in a bit
complex scene, one fail to see details because of the size. And in the same time, I
think
it is a bit to big for a featuree/preview..

//Spider

Post a reply to this message