Clem wrote:
"Glen in Orlando" wrote in news:48afebf6$0$28433
:


Hey Clem...
the most effective method, as compared to your three posts.. is right
here....
Resized to a whopping 135kb...
Quck, easy, and guess what.. a good old fashioned JPEG....
I can view anything posted here...yENC, Mime, etc..etc..
but WHAT IS THE POINT?

Glen in Orlando.


begin 666 E-14209LARGE (Large).jpg

Attachment decoded: E-14209LARGE (Large).jpg
`
end




I agree you can take a file and resize it. If all you have are a few files
it's worthy way to do it. Some people post 20-30 or more files from an
airshow. They can spend a full evening just to resize each picture.

There are some nice shows around here. I would love to take pictures and
share them, but I need to reduce the overhead. I'm not going to reduce each
one seperately unless it's only a few shots.

I collect nose and tail art that's usually taken in high quality. If you take
a high quality picture that's been reduced, you can enlarge it again with
little loss to the quality of it. The question is, which method of reduction
leads to the least amount of quality loss.

Posting a side by side comparison of different transfer techniques seemed
like a logical way to compare them. I would also like to know how everyone is
receiving the files off their servers.

I'm still having problems just seeing all the standards pictures posted. I
see replies regarding them, but I fail to see some of the original posts and
I'm tired of doing a parent search half the time.

Don't worry, I'm not uploading anymore files that size. If anyone could
recommend software that reduces a batch of files at one time, I would
appreciate hearing about it.

You must have missed where I mentioned this. Resize and batch rename
all in one and free.
http://www.faststone.org/

Other free stuff to download also.
Good luck

I really like the photo resizer.

JRW