#1894: Loaf pictures in e-mail

Now this is yet another breeder thing that frosts my pumpkin! If I ruled the world, I would pass a law that says that NO ONE is allowed to send e-mail attachments to ANYONE unless they learn the basics of photo-editing software. That would cut down the amount of brat pictures by about 99%, as most breeders don't know how to reduce the file size of the photos once they scan or download from a digital camera. That's why so many of these loaf pictures are so gigantic that you have to scroll sideways to see the whole thing (not that you would WANT to!).

Even with a smaller file size, there is still no need for a bazillion pics. I mean, does the loaf look any different than it did when moo or duhd took the previous picture five minutes ago? I think not.

This is just so rude, especially when the recipient of the pictures is on dial-up. I have high-speed DSL, but even that chokes up when someone sends too many attachments with huge file sizes. Luckily, I can also check my e-mail on the web and delete the offending attachments that way.

Why can't these dumbass breeders set up a FREE Flickr, Picturetrail or Photobucket site, put the loaf pictures in that, and just send the link to it?

Oh...I know! Because some people might choose not to click, and then there's no captive audience for sprog-worship!

Another word from the original poster here...yeah, I was on dial-up when she had her first kid. I actually sent her a VERY diplomatic e-mail about the number of pictures she was sending (it was usually at least four). I said things along the lines of "I can tell you're so proud of little (kid's name), but I'm on a dial-up connection and pictures take forever to download." The sender responded with...well, another mass-mailed baby update...but at the end of it she added that she was "cutting down the number of pictures per mail to avoid inconveniencing people." Great, I thought. Then when the next mailing arrived it had far fewer pictures, so I didn't have to wait as long before chucking it unopened. Then I realized that I'd gotten THREE e-mails from her...yes, she'd sent the same number of photos, just split into three e-mails! ARRRRGh. So after wandering off to find something to do while her three frickin' e-mails downloaded, I proceeded to chuck all of THOSE ones unopened. I then sent her something saying "Thanks for thinking of me, but..." and I clearly and politely explained that packaging the photos in three e-mails does in fact NOT reduce my download time. I suggested that she set up a website, and then send a link to everyone. That didn't happen...so after a while, I set up my filter. Like I said, flat learning curve, both in the choice to continue having kids with absentee husband, and in the whole understanding-of-bandwidth things.

Being an art director, I know the pain of the massive file sizes people take with their very expensive, high mega pixel digital cameras. @@ The most offensive freshly hatched loaf pic I got was it attached to it's mother's nipple. Yes. But it wasn't fully latched on. Oh no! It's tongue was wrapped around the fucking gigantic red nipple. So I saw my friend's tits and her loaf somewhat attached to it. I wanted to vomit. How disgusting to send that out? Isn't that an intimate thing?