Looks better. So why did you convert it to begin with, if you don't mind me asking?
Looks better. So why did you convert it to begin with, if you don't mind me asking?
Opened in Picture It and saved in jpeg by goof...Originally posted by AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 12:17
Looks better. So why did you convert it to begin with, if you don't mind me asking?
Odd, I didn't think Picture It usually smeared things that much. But as a GIF, the background is transparent as well, so it looks better when the post color changes.
I think some of the smear comes from Village Photos having some sort of jpeg optimizer.Originally posted by AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 12:27
Odd, I didn't think Picture It usually smeared things that much. But as a GIF, the background is transparent as well, so it looks better when the post color changes.
Must be the case, because out of curiosity I just ran it through Picture It and it didn't look too bad. The file size increased about 15% though.
I think some of the smear comes from Village Photos having some sort of jpeg optimizer. [/b][/quote]Originally posted by REALITY+12 September 2003 - 12:29--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (REALITY @ 12 September 2003 - 12:29)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 12:27
Odd, I didn't think Picture It usually smeared things that much. But as a GIF, the background is transparent as well, so it looks better when the post color changes.
No, here's the deal, it's not an optimizer it's a compression tool, and you can turn it off.
Excellent question.Originally posted by AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 02:56
Isn't the 150 pixel restriction supposed to include the text portion as well as the images?
Signatures will be restricted in size and content. Signatures may not excede a 495x150 pixel area, this includes all images and text used. The total file size for all images contained in a signature may not excede 100,000 bytes. Signatures that do not comply may be removed or edited by a moderator or administator.
No, here's the deal, it's not an optimizer it's a compression tool, and you can turn it off. [/b][/quote]Originally posted by SnnY+12 September 2003 - 12:58--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SnnY @ 12 September 2003 - 12:58)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by REALITY@12 September 2003 - 12:29
<!--QuoteBegin-AfterBurn@12 September 2003 - 12:27
Odd, I didn't think Picture It usually smeared things that much. But as a GIF, the background is transparent as well, so it looks better when the post color changes.
I think some of the smear comes from Village Photos having some sort of jpeg optimizer.
Hmmmm...
Thats what I meant, anyway enough said.
How are we supposed to know how many pixels the text takes up? Is my sig too big then?Signatures will be restricted in size and content. Signatures may not excede a 495x150 pixel area, this includes all images and text used. The total file size for all images contained in a signature may not excede 100,000 bytes. Signatures that do not comply may be removed or edited by a moderator or administator.
only by a couple of pixels, but i'm sure the mods don't mind a few pixels...Originally posted by KrackHead2k@14 September 2003 - 05:34
How are we supposed to know how many pixels the text takes up? Is my sig too big then?
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>BLAH</span>
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Wayne Rooney - A thug and a thief</span>
Bookmarks