Re: scaning suggetions from a viewer of our site...

Kevin Goldsmith (
Thu, 24 Aug 1995 15:08:08 -0700 (PDT)

Are we at the point yet where all browsers can view Jpeg? Also, I would
counter suggest to create a GIF (small) thumbnail of your images and then
have the larger JPEG linked to them.


> ----- Begin Included Message -----
> >From Wed Aug 16 05:43:32 1995
> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 95 08:40:52 EDT
> From: (Christina Norman)
> To:
> Subject: scaning
> Content-Length: 982
> Hi, I've been exploring Art on the Net and I've found lots of neat stuff.
> Could you *please* include in your little thing on scanning a brief
> recommendation that JPG format be used. Something along the lines of
> "In general, the JPG format offers the highest quality pictures, while
> keeping image size small enough to be easily downloaded. Scan directly
> to JPG format, or scan to another 24-bit format such as TIFF and then
> convert it to JPG (we can do the conversion for you). GIF format,
> while popular, should not be used as it is an 8-bit format and will
> reduce your image to only 256 colors."
> I realize not all of your users will be very technically oriented, but
> every GIF image I've seen on the site has made me cringe. It's such a
> waste to reduce artwork to 256 colors, when millions are available at
> a smaller file size. Oh, I've found a quality of 80% usually produces
> an image indistinguishable from the original, at a fraction of the TIFF
> file size.
> - Christina
> ----- End Included Message -----