Mike: For the most part, I think my stuff looks ok with one side having a resolution of 640. From there, I usually adjust the jpeg compression to keep it under 200k (think I started doing that because of the limitations here and grew to like the way it looks). I think if I was to knock the images down any further (either in resolution or going for a higher compression) I wouldn't be happy with the photos. I mean, I look at the stuff sometimes and wrinkle my nose at it because I'm sometimes coming from what is really a ~3900x2800 uncompressed image to ~640x460 compressed one. Someone decides to try and steal my work, nothing I can really do about that until it happens. At that point, I work with the laws to try and stop it - if I know it has even happened. Not gonna let someone else's dishonesty/greed effect how my stuff looks. Maybe after it happens though I'll have a change of heart. I mean, I can completely understand guys putting watermarks on their images, but it really does take away from their stuff visually (to me) when I see what looks like a great shot, but it has all kinds of artifacting in it a big name across the image somewhere. Don't read the above wrong either...I really appreciate your input on this. Hell, you're looking out for me... that in itself is totally cool! :) -=>Donald