On Mon, Jun 28, 1999 at 09:08:17PM -0700, Darren O. Benham wrote: > Why not .jpg? We're using it for the logo, atleast, because transparency > isn't an issue.. the background of both logo and web page are white. > Because I wasn't thinking. :) As long as the jpg image is of acceptable quality we can use it.
I'm really not keen on the jpg format, though, for technical reasons. Editing a jpg is like washing clothes, but worse. Every time you edit it, the quality of the image deteriorates(*). There are new, lossy formats that do better compression, handle sharp lines better and don't deteriorate with each save. Jay Treacy (*) You don't even need to modify it. Open an image and do a SaveAs. It is not the same as the image you started with.
