Upload both images anduse html to link the small one to the large one.
edit: that said, the images you have posted so far look better small. It's only worth linking to the large image if anything is hard to make out at the smaller size.
(edit: that said, the images you have posted so far look better small. It's only worth linking to the large image if anything is hard to make out at the smaller size.
monkeon schmonkeon,
Sun 18 Mar 2012, 0:10,
archived)
yeah this looks better bigger if you like the look of the inside of a cows arse hole?
(,
Sun 18 Mar 2012, 0:19,
archived)
:OI think where you might be going wrong is that you are stretching the image using html rather than making it large in the first place.
If the image was made at 400 pixels, but needed to be reduced to 200 in order to keep the file size down, then upload both and link the small to the large.
If only a 200 pixel wide image exists, then post it at 200 - the quality loss from stretching it is not worth it.
(If the image was made at 400 pixels, but needed to be reduced to 200 in order to keep the file size down, then upload both and link the small to the large.
If only a 200 pixel wide image exists, then post it at 200 - the quality loss from stretching it is not worth it.
monkeon schmonkeon,
Sun 18 Mar 2012, 0:24,
archived)
ah i see. Yeah i made it at 200px because otherwise it was to big to upload to a hosting site. its a shame 200 is so tiny!
(,
Sun 18 Mar 2012, 0:27,
archived)
You should look into other methods of image compressionless frames and less colours can often be unnoticeable but shrink a file considerably.
( monkeon schmonkeon,
Sun 18 Mar 2012, 0:31,
archived)