I've been trying to post an animation to povray.binaries.animations, and it
keeps getting rejected. At first I thought it was because the attachment was
too big, because I get this message:

Outlook Express could not post your message.  Subject 'Blow yer mind, dude',
Account: 'news.povray.org', Server: 'news.povray.org', Protocol: NNTP,
Server Response: '441 Articles may not be larger than 1000000 bytes', Port:
119, Secure(SSL): No, Server Error: 441, Error Number: 0x800CCCA9

But my file is only 876 kb, and I looked at other posts and there are many
which ar larger than that. What could be wrong?
Steve Shelby

Post a reply to this message

Steve Shelby wrote:

> I've been trying to post an animation to povray.binaries.animations, and it
> keeps getting rejected. At first I thought it was because the attachment was
> too big, because I get this message:
> 
> Outlook Express could not post your message.  Subject 'Blow yer mind, dude',
> Account: 'news.povray.org', Server: 'news.povray.org', Protocol: NNTP,
> Server Response: '441 Articles may not be larger than 1000000 bytes', Port:
> 119, Secure(SSL): No, Server Error: 441, Error Number: 0x800CCCA9
> 
> But my file is only 876 kb, and I looked at other posts and there are many
> which ar larger than that. What could be wrong?
> Steve Shelby

I noticed the same thing. You just have to make the file smaller. Maybe 
this is about some encoding thing?

Severi

Post a reply to this message

Severi Salminen wrote:
> Steve Shelby wrote:
>
>> I've been trying to post an animation to povray.binaries.animations,
>> and it keeps getting rejected. At first I thought it was because the
>> attachment was too big, because I get this message:
>>
>> Outlook Express could not post your message.  Subject 'Blow yer
>> mind, dude', Account: 'news.povray.org', Server: 'news.povray.org',
>> Protocol: NNTP, Server Response: '441 Articles may not be larger
>> than 1000000 bytes', Port: 119, Secure(SSL): No, Server Error: 441,
>> Error Number: 0x800CCCA9
>>
>> But my file is only 876 kb, and I looked at other posts and there
>> are many which ar larger than that. What could be wrong?
>> Steve Shelby
>
> I noticed the same thing. You just have to make the file smaller.
> Maybe this is about some encoding thing?

Yes, have a look at how big the messages are in pba, then compare that to
the attachment sizes.  You will see a difference and can probably work out
what the true maximum size you can upload is.

Post a reply to this message

In article <4055a0b2$1@news.povray.org> , "Steve Shelby" 
<ssh### [at] rexnetnet> wrote:

> But my file is only 876 kb, and I looked at other posts and there are many
> which ar larger than that. What could be wrong?
> Steve Shelby

It is that size *before* encoding.  Your newsreader first has to encode it,
which adds at least 25%.  The larger messages you see are multipart posts
where the newsreader (automatically) split the file into several smaller
chunks.  While this will work, it is recommended you do no make too heavy
use of it (you could also post like 10 GB with it in 10000 parts)...

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

Thank you for the explanation. As it turns out, compressing the file enough
to make it acceptable to the newsgroup pretty much ruins it, so I'm going to
try to set up a link on the web instead.
Steve Shelby

"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message
news:4055b16e$1@news.povray.org...
> In article <4055a0b2$1@news.povray.org> , "Steve Shelby"
> <ssh### [at] rexnetnet> wrote:
>
> > But my file is only 876 kb, and I looked at other posts and there are
many
> > which ar larger than that. What could be wrong?
> > Steve Shelby
>
> It is that size *before* encoding.  Your newsreader first has to encode
it,
> which adds at least 25%.  The larger messages you see are multipart posts
> where the newsreader (automatically) split the file into several smaller
> chunks.  While this will work, it is recommended you do no make too heavy
> use of it (you could also post like 10 GB with it in 10000 parts)...
>
>     Thorsten
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
> e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
>
> Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

Steve Shelby <ssh### [at] rexnetnet> wrote:
> Thank you for the explanation. As it turns out, compressing the file enough
> to make it acceptable to the newsgroup pretty much ruins it, so I'm going to
> try to set up a link on the web instead.

You should try JPEG2000.

<ducks>

Post a reply to this message

In article <4055f2e4$1@news.povray.org> , Eamon Caddigan <eca### [at] uiucedu>
wrote:

> You should try JPEG2000.
>
> <ducks>

The video equivalent would be H.264 (aka MPEG-4 Part 10 aka MPEG-4 AVC
(Advanced Video Coding))...

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message