[Leica] AOL's Poor Quality Browser? / Jeff / Marvin / Will

[Leikon35 <Leikon35@aol.com>]

 In a message dated 98-04-07 13:16:26 EDT, Jeff Moore wrote:
<<   And I would further contend that anyone purporting to put
 an image up for display should, in addition to the 640x480 thumbnails
 for the computationally challenged, supply a jpeg in the 1280x1K range
 (1Kx768 as an absolute minimum), with minimally destructive jpeg
 compression (`quality' setting no less than 75?).
  >>
 I can't help but agree with Jeff, since those of you that have already
 looked at the Clark Gable B&W pic and gave me an explanation of
 why it looked so poor on my AOL browser that showed it at only 9K
 whereas It was uploaded at 72K and still appears so on Netscape &
 other browsers,  but on not AOL's  %$&*!* system.

 The photo was scanned at 75dpi from a 43 year old photo which I have
 here in front of me & while there is a significant loss of resolution - the
 tonal range IMHO is great, especially so since it is my first attempt at
 putting anything on the web.  Please look & tell me what you think as
 I still haven't resolved the problem of it looking so poorly on the AOL 
 browser.  Even Will von Dauster's beautiful SF photos looked bad til I
 switched over to Netscape.  Will advised me to change my display to
 the highest quality setting, which I did - with no improvement. Anyone ?

          http://members.aol.com/Leikon35/index.html

 Marvin Moss