-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Eric CHAPUZOT wrote:
| and waste the time to find the good ratio of jpeg is nothing...
	90% quality will almost always give good results (it does for your
image) and it reduces the size to 110k. That's not optimal but it
still a whole lot better than 700k

| when i make a 700 ko picture on my computer and i must do a 200 ko
one, i
| loose 200 ko more on my disk space
	So, basically, you're saying that it's better to waste 500k
permanently on someone else's computer that to use 200k temporarily on
yours?

		Jerome

PS: No, Zeger isn't the only one to think that images should be posted
in JPEG...

- --
******************************
*      Jerome M. Berger      *
* mailto:jbe### [at] ifrancecom *
*  http://jeberger.free.fr/  *
******************************
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCY/diqIYJdJhyixIRArBYAJoDbBSIHZTUAEi03d7W4LBrhjVI+wCeI9US
rOKjUbw4uKD5TR4KV+Gg7pw=
=fwZa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Post a reply to this message

4263f760
> So, basically, you're saying that it's better to waste 500k
> permanently on someone else's computer that to use 200k temporarily on
> yours?
>
but if he wants , he can make a 200 ko with the 700 ko ...
it's more difficult to obtain the quality of 700ko starting the 200ko

i dream a format including original script ( few ko) and a formated type 
(200ko for example)...
... here, it'll be difficult because the texture of glass need 2 Mo.

but who will want to compute the script here ???
next time, i'll think send low ko first and maximum ko after in the post and 
after elements of the script...
if even i arrive there.

Post a reply to this message

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Eric CHAPUZOT wrote:

> 4263f760
> 
>>So, basically, you're saying that it's better to waste 500k
>>permanently on someone else's computer that to use 200k temporarily on
>>yours?
>>
> 
> but if he wants , he can make a 200 ko with the 700 ko ...
> it's more difficult to obtain the quality of 700ko starting the 200ko
> 
	I was talking about the server... Of course, anyone who views it can
make a higher compressed version if he wants it, but that wasn't my
point. Moreover, when people want higher quality versions of an image,
they usually ask for the source or the desktop size version, but
they're perfectly happy with JPEG even for a desktop pic.

		Jerome
- --
******************************
*      Jerome M. Berger      *
* mailto:jbe### [at] ifrancecom *
*  http://jeberger.free.fr/  *
******************************
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCZCHBqIYJdJhyixIRAvGyAJ47iuLejeBbpHSvwZhzTK5Sx/neGwCdFpV+
P+XW0uFfJGzF6JNnfeQKWHc=
=euNk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Post a reply to this message

High!

Spock wrote:

 > You have a 300 baud modem???  That must make life easier for you. 
All I have are these two bare copper wires that I have to tap together 
to encode my files for transmission...  and don't even ask about download!

Yes, here in Afghanistan... as there is no working electricity grid, we 
still use donkeys to deliver the electrons to be re-converted into data!

See you in Khyberspace!

Yadgar

Now playing: Parallels, 1977 live version (Yes) - on my donkey-driven 
tape recorder!

Post a reply to this message

"Eric CHAPUZOT" <ech### [at] evhrnet> wrote:
> this could be enough for show too... how to decide where are the limits ?
>
> i say no limit is best limit.


How we creat a net? thanks.

Post a reply to this message