<sob>

Another troll makes it to the kill file.



--
Steven Pigeon, Ph. D.
pig### [at] iroumontrealca
"IMBJR" <no### [at] spamhere> wrote in message
news:ff9s401aug9ojpcbaqevsgmomr2mtlu6nh@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:11:55 -0500, "Steven Pigeon"
> <pig### [at] iroumontrealca> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Perhaps. But it's my call, not yours.
> >>
> >
> >As it is ours; see, I find it convenient to look
> >at the pictures in this news group without going
> >through more stages of decoding. Maybe you
> >should wait until browsers/newsreaders support
> >jpeg2000/yencode/whatever before using it.
>
> That's just laziness. One extra little bit of effort and you can
> easily see my posts. Dear me.
>
> >
> >True, Jpeg2000 is a better format, nonetheless,
> >even if you render your picture at desktop resolutions
> >(1280x1024 or more) you should post relatively
> >small versions here, and small pictures (say, 800x600
> >or less) can be efficiently compressed using baseline
> >jpeg with higher quality settings.
>
> The image size is the image size. That's the size it was meant to be
> shown at. Have you no concept of scale and its artistic use?
>
> >
> >ftp/http links to the full resolution png versions (or
> >other picture formats, whatever) should be given
> >instead of the full versions here. I don't see myself
> >posting a 2 or 3 Mb file to this newsgroup, even if
> >such large messages are supported.
>
> It was not the full version. The TIFF in the archive is the full
> version.
>
> >
> >True, yencode is good, better than uuencode/base64,
> >yet, not all newsreaders support it. It's cumbersome.
>
> That's another matter of debate. I've used it and it definately is
> quicker, but I've see discussion of how yEnc is basically a fix for
> something that was not broken (MIME I tink they were referring to).
>
> >
> >
> >Best,
> >
> >    S.
>
> --------------------------------
> My First Subgenius Picture Book:
> http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message