Pete,
Point of fact -- When images view poorly within a page, but quite well
when "right clicked," the fault is NOT that of Arachne.
The next time you find this situation, do an F4 and then an F7 search
for the name of the graphic; I'm willing to bet next month's paycheck
you discover that the HTML code has "height=" and/or "width=" parameters
within the code page. All well trained browsers take the HTML code
"sizing" as law -- even if it results in distortion of the graphic as a
consequence. The only cure for that type of situation is to write to
the author of the page and point out that there *are* other options for
fitting graphics to a page which don't result in such distortions. [On
my web page I have used both methods ... whichever makes the best "view"
is what I use.]
On Wed, 09 Aug 2000 22:06:52 -0500, "Pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Curious about A16x's sometimes poor processing of BMP's and JPG's.
> Certain images just don't come out right *on the page*, but when viewed
> solo via rt clk, they're fine. Case in point: cropped a bunch of JPG's
> and dsplayed them (all 20) on one HTML page. Each had a width of 100 and
> whatever hieght would maintain proper aspect. five pix consistantly
> showed heavy distortion. Also I find many pix on the web are poorly
> shown. I gather there must be something wrong with my installation, as
> there have not been any Q's about this...
And now you may have an idea why others haven't brought up the "poor
rendition by Arachne." <G> It's not your installation, it's not
Arachne, it's the guyz who don't think when they design their websites.
l.d.
--
Learn about B'FOR
Join B'FOR - B'mothers For Open Records
<a href="http://www.b-for.org">B'FOR www.b-for.org</a>
[Associate members of triad also welcome; membership confidential if desired.]
-- Arachne V1.64, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
