1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

I just dont understand???

Discussion in 'PUBLIC Vintage Chatter - Anything and everything' started by b*a*vintagequeen, Sep 30, 2004.

  1. b*a*vintagequeen

    b*a*vintagequeen Registered Guest

  2. pastperfect2

    pastperfect2 Alumni +

    No, they are fine. I have had both Men's and Women's Harris tweed bomb, too. Or go for next to nothing. It's not label I buy any more unless the item will make it on it's own desserts.

    Hollis
     
  3. b*a*vintagequeen

    b*a*vintagequeen Registered Guest

    Thanks! Oh well I have it on a pending relist to start while I am away next week..hopefully I will come home and find it bid on..the colors are really nice in it!
     
  4. sues*stuff

    sues*stuff VFG Member

    Queenie-

    I didn't think they were bad, but I checked the file size of some of the pictures and they were pretty large. I don't have a problem because I'm on cable, but maybe some folks with dial up never get to the images.

    Just a thought,

    Sue
     
  5. Didn't Justine have a Harris tweed that sold in the mall, or am i delusional?

    Could be both :)
     
  6. I had a Harris Tweed that sold last week. I think I had to run it twice. I thought it would bring more than it did . It sold for $37.99.:(
     
  7. bartondoll

    bartondoll Guest

    Over a year ago I had two Harris tweeds sell that I started at $49.99
    and I ended up with several bids on both of them. This year I still have one
    that has been relisted twice.....these are such nice coats that I would rather hold onto it than give it away.

    I agree with the picture size. I have the same problem. I'm on cable and forget sometimes how long dialups take to load larger size pic files.

    Sue
     
  8. I just figured out in photoshop that you can "Save for Web" and the visual size stays the same, but it somehow compresses or reduces the pixels....i think i had one that was 400k and it shrunk it to around 55k..
     
  9. sues*stuff

    sues*stuff VFG Member

    Am I imagining it, or did I once hear you should try to keep images under 25K?

    Sue
     
  10. b*a*vintagequeen

    b*a*vintagequeen Registered Guest

    So do you mean that when I take my photos I should not be using the "best" digital quality, or are the measurement sizes to big?

    I am not going to retake these photos now as they are set to relist when I am gone. Maybe I will start using the lowest setting on my camera and see what happens.

    Thanks guys...gotta go finish packing for Florida..leaving tomorrow!
     
  11. Cute coat!

    I had a short disaster, out-using my photo-hosting capacity, using my own bCentral website, around a year and a half ago. After being told by a few 'techies' that I needed to purchase oodles more webspace for oodles more dollars, one noticed my picture file size and told me that I really only needed to adjust my photo quality to 'medium'/for web use, as 'best'/photo quality was really only for print photos and takes too much space for Internet use. I've been drastically 'under' my alotted space ever since.

    Steph
     
  12. b*a*vintagequeen

    b*a*vintagequeen Registered Guest

  13. bartondoll

    bartondoll Guest

    Steph's right...."medium" or even "good" is all that is need for
    web use re the pic quality. I now use 'good'

    Sue
     

Share This Page