hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

RSS story archive

RE: mistake/1st Edge of Eden

  • Subject: RE: [iris-photos] mistake/1st Edge of Eden
  • From: "Char Holte" cholte@wi.rr.com
  • Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:13:59 -0500
  • Importance: Normal

I just tried something yesterday you all might be interested in.  My
pictures are photo ready and I really hated to reduce the pixels.  That left
me open to the opportunity of printing the wrong one.  
So what I did was reduce the overall size of the picture.  In fact I made
Burst of Blue 1 inch wide.  Then you could receive it easily and when you
enlarged it the quality was still there.  Hope this helps some of you.
Char, New Berlin, WI

-----Original Message-----
From: iris-photos@yahoogroups.com [mailto:iris-photos@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Catherine Button
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 8:46 AM
To: iris-photos@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [iris-photos] mistake/1st Edge of Eden

Well, I think many of us have accidently posted something way too large, 
or more often, forgotten to attach anything!

But I have another wish.... I wish that John would INCREASE the 
recommended photo size. A 100k is not a problem on a dialup modem. There 
are some emails without photos on this list that are that size!  When 
most folks post a large photo by mistake, it is usually 600k or larger, 
which *is* pushing the limit a tad as well as eating up space way faster 
in the archives. But the ability to get a good look at a seedling, or 
see an interesting beard, is really compromised in some of these very 
tiny pics...

Besides, why *punish* everyone that does have a dsl or cable connection?


donald wrote:

>I'm going to make a wish.  I do believe it would be nice if Chris 
>lowered the size photo file hort.net archives would accept.  I know it 
>probably has a limit, but perhaps it should be smaller still.  I 
>realized I'd forgotten to reduce the photo when it was taking too long 
>to transmit.  I actually turned off my computer trying to prevent 
>submission, but apparently it went anyway.  I guess once they get to 
>Norton and are being scanned for virus, it is too late.  At least I 
>haven't ever managed to abort a sent message at that stage.  It didn't 
>appear, so I resent one with a reasonable size.  Obviously both are 
>there now.  Folks that get them in their mailbox are victimized 
>regardless.  So my apologies - yet again.
>Donald Eaves
>Texas Zone 7b, USA
>Yahoo! Groups Links

My words are mine, and don't reflect the views of my employer.
Catherine Button    Network Administrator and corporate irritant
cathy@pavcal.com    Phone: 609-518-3700 x4444  Fax: 609-518-3720

 "When I drop in my tracks, I want the body to skid for a week."

Yahoo! Groups Links


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Has someone you know been affected by illness or disease?
Network for Good is THE place to support health awareness efforts!

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement