Subject:
|
Re: image sizes on Brickshelf
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Mon, 28 Jan 2002 17:56:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
974 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Steve Barile writes:
> After looking at Ben's pictures I had a question for everyone. I find it
> difficult to take in the entire picture when I have to scroll. I was
> wondering if anyone else had any feelings about what the optimal size pic is
> to post (on say, Brickshelf).
I usually go for the 'low end', and size my pictures to around 640x480. If
someone asks for a more detailed image of something, I'll either go
full-size, or try to crop down to just what they want to see.
I've got a 3.3megapixel camera, so if I go 'full size' they become some
rather large images!
JohnG, GMLTC
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: image sizes on Brickshelf
|
| (...) I'm in the low end camp. For most things, a 640x480 image is plenty, especially if you crop it. I will go up to 800x600 or even 1024x768, but I much prefer to keep them small. Of course I'm still running a 33k modem so large images are a (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jan-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | image sizes on Brickshelf
|
| After looking at Ben's pictures I had a question for everyone. I find it difficult to take in the entire picture when I have to scroll. I was wondering if anyone else had any feelings about what the optimal size pic is to post (on say, Brickshelf). (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jan-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
15 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
