On 10/06/2015 03:55 PM, HilsB wrote: > NoOp wrote: >> On 10/6/2015 6:32 AM, Jonathan N. Little wrote: >>> Paul B. Gallagher wrote: >>>> HilsB wrote: >>>>> Paul B. Gallagher wrote: >>>>>> Ron Lesan wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> *Butting in 'cause I have the same problem --- and I don't* >>>>>>> *understand the explanation --- 99% of what?* >>>>>> >>>>>> Read the first two lines of my explanation. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you send as HTML, you can specify the image size in percent (of >>>>>>>> the screen size). Do Insert | Image, navigate to the image location >>>>>>>> on your computer, and select it. In the insert dialog, choose the >>>>>>>> "Dimensions" tab, "Custom size," and enter the width in "percent" >>>>>>>> (not "pixels"). SeaMonkey will also insist that you enter an >>>>>>>> "alternate text," which should be a short descriptive word or >>>>>>>> phrase. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You need not specify both height and width; 99% width is enough. >>>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the replies. >>>>> I am aware of and have used this method when inserting photos. 75% width >>>>> works well for me. >>>>> My point is that it is a fairly cumbersome process particularly when >>>>> compared to the Apple mail options on image size. >>>> >>>> Fair point. Sorry I have nothing more to offer. >>>> >>> >>> How about resampling images for email. Say reduce to no larger than 600 >>> or 800 px on a side. I use ImageMagick on Linux and IrfanViewer on >>> Windows to batch reduce images for web use. >>> >>> The advantage is is manifold. The embedded image will not be too big to >>> be viewed by the recipient for typical monitor resolution. >>> >>> Next scaling with constraining HTML attributes does not REDUCE the data >>> size of the image. Whereas resampling an image will, and such reduction >>> can dramatically reduce the size in bytes. No everyone has real >>> broadband and may have limited data plans >>> >>> Lastly email's legacy was a text-only protocol, so binary data must be >>> encoded to character data. Such encoding can balloon binary data often >>> doubling its size making the bandwidth issue worse. So that fresh from >>> the camera 5-10MB image can easily balloon to 7-20MB when encoded for >>> SMTP. >>> >>> >> >> For Windows, give the freeware FastStone Image Viewer a spin - the email >> option (File|Email|Send Email) automatically defaults to a 640x480 >> resize, which you can change of course from 120x90 to 2272x1704 (or >> custom size). You can also compress multiple images into a single file >> for the email attachement. Email option works (for me) flawlessly with >> SeaMonkey. >> >> http://www.faststone.org/index.htm >> http://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDownload.htm >> >> The FastStone Photo Resizer is also free also & works well: >> http://www.faststone.org/download.htm >> > Thanks for all the replies. I guess I'll just continue to use the 'resize' > within mail composer. > My friend no longer has the ability to manipulate files, is easily confused > and frustrated. > My best to you all. >
I'm confused... if you use FastStone to view your photographs, select the one's that you want to send, and use the File|Email option the photos are resized to your liking. Your friend can then view the photos in the email at a size he likes as well. Why don't you load it up and give it a try? Oh wait... you weren't kind enough to tell us what OS you are using, so let me guess from your headers: Mac Never mind - I only use linux & Windows _______________________________________________ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
