"Brian's reply mentioned that with the June improvements, surely we could have images larger than 300 x 300." --

DRACE68 - TallPocket's/brian's reply 'suggested' that with the new and improved gallery switch over it 'seemed' to him that the writer's gallery might have more space and speed with the 'upgrades' made to allow larger images in the writer's gallery.

"Could" being the accurate word.  LOL.

I just wondered why one could use up to 512 kb file sizes in the 'gallery' but not in the 'writers' gallery? That shows to me that a 'picture' in the gallery is deemed more worthy than a written work and subsequent accompanying uploaded picture?

I also am puzzled as to why this site, unlike many other similar artistic sites, are size limited to just 512 kb and other uploaded formats such as PNG, etc.? Especially, with the new and improved gallery, server, etc.? Just wondering out loud.

Is the new gallery and server faster? Does it allow for more file sizes? In real terms that are measurable, how much faster IS this new and improved site? I find it not to be any faster or slower on my Directv broadband/1MB dish system than before? Just my own experiences, thus far.

TallPockets, Lost In Cyberspace. WINK.