Re: Re: Why small > big?

> [SNIP] > Considering in this thread where I left the quality at 100% and > reduced the image to less 40 percent of the original, and the end > result was that I actually made a larger file. So, I belive that at > least this example shows that 100% is not a good quality value > setting for reducing images -- thus we know the high end is less than > 100. I know from experience that reducing the quality from 100% to 95% sometimes reduces the file size to 50%; without showing much noticeable change in quality... HTH