Arwin High-Bandwidth is right to point out that the compression of jpegs with
WinZIP is not great, only about 10% on a file of a several hundred kilobytes.
And GIFs are smaller than JPEGs only under the circumstances he described.
Tim
 
Arwin van Arum wrote:
 
> There are a couple of misguided bits of info in this mail. 1 - Winzip will
> not (significantly) further compress JPG files. 2 - GIF is not smaller than
> JPG - only in rare occasions, when there are fewer than 256 colours, large
> square patterns of exactly (and I mean exactly) the same colour will a GIF
> be smaller. Otherwise a GIF will still be 2 or 3 times bigger than a good
> quality JPG.
>
> Other things are true, however: there are usually limits on lists that
> prevent attachments from over 64kb, message sizes of 64kb, and on some lists
> no attachments at all can be broadcasted. Not only is this done because some
> connections are slow, but not everyone uses an up-to-date browser that will
> properly handle the attachment and turn up lots of garbage.
>
> The suggestion to provide a link is best - I do that a lot, and if you send
> the image to me I will post it up for everyone to take a look at. I have a
> lightning-fast 250kb+/sec connection so it'd be a very small effort and the
> site I host it on is very fast. My T.S. Eliot site is hosted there too (at
> http://people.a2000.nl/avanarum/ ).
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Arwin
>
> > Wayne,
> > The listserver could be enforcing a limit on the size of
> > attachments. FYI, on many other lists, you'd be flamed to a crisp
> > for sending an attachment that size, because some folks still have
> > very slow dialup connections or pay high rates for their online
> > time or use mail readers whose attachment-handling capabilities
> > are crude. It could take 20 minutes or more to bring down an image
> > that size over a slower connection. When I receive large email
> > attachments, they sometimes cause my ISP's mail server to fail to
> > release a lock on my mailbox, and I have to make a phone call to
> > tech support, remain on hold for ? minutes, and then get them to
> > fix the problem.  While I am waiting for them to fix the problem,
> > I continue to receive, over and over, mail I've already
> > downloaded. Given such technical problems, the usual etiquette is
> > to announce the availability of such an image and a willingness to
> > send it directly to those who request it or to put it on a web
> > site and announce the URL from where it may be downloaded. To make
> > it smaller, you could compress it using WinZIP
> > (http://www.winzip.com).  Or you could save it as a GIF after
> > reducing its color depth.
> > Tim Romano
> >
> > Wayne Pounds wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for the confirmation, but no one has seen the
> > > JPEG image I sent Friday? Excuse my persistance, but I
> > > am sure this artist's work would be of great interest
> > > to the ep list. I'll resend the image if necessary,
> > > perhaps in another format or smaller size (the JPEG
> > > was 400+)? Can someone with technical savoir faire
> > > advise?
> > >
> > > Wayne
> > > @Rapallo
> > >