On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 10:03:19 -0600, dpb wrote:

On 12/30/2015 7:17 PM, Ignoramus24626 wrote:
...

I did consider this very deeply.

I very strongly believe in high resolution and quality of video and
images. 320 pixel videos make me cringe.

I feel that on most websites with pictures, the pictures are way too
small to be useful. They are economizing on bytes that cost next
to nothing, at the expense of clarity and ability to zoom in.
...

But certainly it's a cost to those of us who otherwise might look at
'em, if that's your intent. If they're there only for your
entertainment, so be it, but I quit at about 1/8-th of the way thru as
even w/ my wireless connection it was going to be several minutes to see
even one full image. There can't be that much useful info in a snapshot
of a smoker, sorry.

Whoop! That download time of less than two seconds was for Ig's
rigging photos. For the smoker, it took 7 seconds.

--
Ed Huntress