Slow screen refresh in Windows
tjframe at gmail.com
Wed Nov 9 20:53:03 CST 2005
Well large solid color spaces surrounded by text will show show a bit of
artifacting at level 5, but for most photos 5 or 6 is fine. Besides you can
always bump it up if you need better quality. Either way they are way faster
than using BMPS, at least on my system.
On 11/9/05, Cubist at aol.com <Cubist at aol.com> wrote:
> sez tjframe at gmail.com:
> > Try using a JPEG, they are much smaller - that same routine runs in 91
> >milliseconds when using a JPEG set at quality level 10 in Photoshop
> >is nearly loseless). In fact for on-screen use you can save a JPEG down
> >to about 5 in Photoshop without any serious degradation in quality.
> Maybe. It *strongly* depends on exactly what's *in* the image you're
> working with. You should always have the "Preview" checkbox checked when
> you save
> an image as JPEG, so you can see for yourself how badly your image gets
> distorted as you reduce the quality level.
> In addition, you might want to consider Photoshop's Save As Web function,
> which gives you fine-grained control over various adjustments, lets you
> the filesize down to pretty much any arbitrary figure, and also lets you
> compare the untouched image to 1-3 different versions with different sets
> adjustments. Me, I use Save As Web religiously for all the graphics in my
> fantasy-and-science-fiction webzines TSAT (http://tsat.transform.to or
> http://tsat.xepher.net) and ANTHRO (http://anthrozine.com).
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
More information about the use-livecode