My 1 2 3 Test info

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.

Try this:

http://www.gpsoft.com.au/

OK, it comes at a cost, but the "Tools" "Convert Images" facility is
superb - once you work out what to do.

I understand that Irfanview, free of charge, has a similar facility.

--
Moving things in still pictures!

"®i©ardo" schreef in bericht
...
Clem wrote:
"Glen in Orlando" wrote in news:48afebf6$0$28433
:


SNIP

Hey Clem...
SNIP


http://www.gpsoft.com.au/

OK, it comes at a cost, but the "Tools" "Convert Images" facility is
superb - once you work out what to do.

I understand that Irfanview, free of charge, has a similar facility.

--
Moving things in still pictures!

Irfanview is the greatest!
It can convert many formats and can downsize to any factor you like.
Once you set up a "scale" factor and the desired filetype and tell it where
you want the resized pictures to be saved it remembers this until you tell
it otherwise.
After that each picture takes about 3 seconds, depending on how fast you can
load and save them.

If you're really enthousiastic, send the brilliant writer, Irfan Skiljan,
some money. This is not mandatory since he is very proud of his program (and
rightly so) but it will encourage him to develop even more clever tricks.
I have no association with him but I do admire his cleverness.

Regards,
Herman

"Herman" wrote in news:b8a5e$48b081a3$52480d09
:

Irfanview

This one looks like a winner. I just downloaded it. Time to play!

®i©ardo wrote in
:

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.

Try this:

http://www.gpsoft.com.au/

OK, it comes at a cost, but the "Tools" "Convert Images" facility is
superb - once you work out what to do.

I understand that Irfanview, free of charge, has a similar facility.


This makes two I never heard of before. 30 day evaluation is a nice selling
point. I think the price is $65.

Clem wrote:
®i©ardo wrote in
:

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.
Try this:

http://www.gpsoft.com.au/

OK, it comes at a cost, but the "Tools" "Convert Images" facility is
superb - once you work out what to do.

I understand that Irfanview, free of charge, has a similar facility.


This makes two I never heard of before. 30 day evaluation is a nice selling
point. I think the price is $65.


You could pick up an earlier version at much lower cost from:

http://almomiz.com/software/pc/other...opus_v8.0.html

Its main purpose is as a Windows Explorer replacement and I've found it
to be an incredibly versatile program - I'd be lost without it.

--
Moving things in still pictures!

®i©ardo wrote in
:

Clem wrote:
®i©ardo wrote in
:

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.
Try this:

http://www.gpsoft.com.au/

OK, it comes at a cost, but the "Tools" "Convert Images" facility is
superb - once you work out what to do.

I understand that Irfanview, free of charge, has a similar facility.


This makes two I never heard of before. 30 day evaluation is a nice
selling point. I think the price is $65.


You could pick up an earlier version at much lower cost from:

http://almomiz.com/software/pc/other...opus_v8.0.html

Its main purpose is as a Windows Explorer replacement and I've found
it to be an incredibly versatile program - I'd be lost without it.

I've used Directory Opus since version 3 or 4 on my old Commodore Amiga
500 in the late '80s - it's a winner!

Bob ^,,^