"Rob" wrote..

Just a suggestion if you want help, I presume you have split one photo into
5 bits and posted those seperately so we have to spend time in the
reconstitution of your photo.
Why not just post one reduced size photo of about 500Kb that we can all see
instantly. If you need to show some detail to aid diagnosis then cut and
expand that bit and post that as another separate photo.

--
Regards
Bob Hobden

In article ,
"Bob Hobden" wrote:

"Rob" wrote..

Just a suggestion if you want help, I presume you have split one photo into
5 bits and posted those seperately so we have to spend time in the
reconstitution of your photo.
Why not just post one reduced size photo of about 500Kb that we can all see
instantly. If you need to show some detail to aid diagnosis then cut and
expand that bit and post that as another separate photo.




--
8^)~ Sue (remove the x to email)
~~~~
http://www.suzanne-eckhardt.com/

In article ,
"Bob Hobden" wrote:

"Rob" wrote..

Just a suggestion if you want help, I presume you have split one photo into
5 bits and posted those seperately so we have to spend time in the
reconstitution of your photo.
Why not just post one reduced size photo of about 500Kb that we can all see
instantly. If you need to show some detail to aid diagnosis then cut and
expand that bit and post that as another separate photo.

Sometimes that just happens automatically if a photo
is real large, as this photo was. I've had it happen
to me when I've forgotten to reduce the size of the
photo. One doesn't have to split the photo up - the
computer does it for you.

My newsreader reassembles the bits so I can see the
whole photo. Doesn't yours?

--
8^)~ Sue (remove the x to email)
~~~~
http://wacvet.blogspot.com/
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=wacvet
http://www.myspace.com/wacvet22
http://www.suzanne-eckhardt.com/
http://www.intergnat.com/malebashing/
http://www.intergnat.com/pussygames/

"Suzie-Q" wrote after "Bob Hobden" wrote:

Just a suggestion if you want help, I presume you have split one photo
into
5 bits and posted those seperately so we have to spend time in the
reconstitution of your photo.
Why not just post one reduced size photo of about 500Kb that we can all
see
instantly. If you need to show some detail to aid diagnosis then cut and
expand that bit and post that as another separate photo.

Sometimes that just happens automatically if a photo
is real large, as this photo was. I've had it happen
to me when I've forgotten to reduce the size of the
photo. One doesn't have to split the photo up - the
computer does it for you.

My newsreader reassembles the bits so I can see the
whole photo. Doesn't yours?

Perhaps because I haven't posted any very large files it has never happened
to me, I doubt OE would cut it up anyway, probably just try to post, and
the server would refuse to send. Or it would get posted and you would all
complain about the size of the file. :-)

No it doesn't join them up again, the "bits" show as 5 separate posts, one
shows the top bit and the rest are just code.

--
Regards
Bob Hobden

"Suzie-Q" wrote after
"Bob Hobden" wrote
Just a suggestion if you want help, I presume you have split one photo
into
5 bits and posted those seperately so we have to spend time in the
reconstitution of your photo.
Why not just post one reduced size photo of about 500Kb that we can all
see
instantly. If you need to show some detail to aid diagnosis then cut and
expand that bit and post that as another separate photo.

Thanks for that Suzie-Q.

The tree is badly damaged, although I don't think it's dead, the top and
growing tip certainly are.
You could cut off the dead bits and see what happens, probably just expand
outwards, but it will never look like it should.
Personally I'd either dig it up and treat it as a Bonsai or bin it and
replace.

--
Regards
Bob Hobden

There's a setting in OE to break or not, it's at Tools, Accounts, (News
Account), Properties, Advanced. In OE, however, you have to combine and
decode manually although it does seem to assemble the parts in mail.

Bob Hobden wrote:
||
| Perhaps because I haven't posted any very large files it has never
| happened to me, I doubt OE would cut it up anyway, probably just try
| to post, and the server would refuse to send. Or it would get posted
| and you would all complain about the size of the file. :-)
|
| No it doesn't join them up again, the "bits" show as 5 separate
| posts, one shows the top bit and the rest are just code.

"Joan F (MI)" wrote ...
There's a setting in OE to break or not, it's at Tools, Accounts, (News
Account), Properties, Advanced. In OE, however, you have to combine and
decode manually although it does seem to assemble the parts in mail.


I'd forgotten about that, thanks, but will leave well alone, don't want my
photos broken up. :-)

--
Regards
Bob Hobden

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:00:11 +0100, "Bob Hobden"
wrote:


"Joan F (MI)" wrote ...
There's a setting in OE to break or not, it's at Tools, Accounts, (News
Account), Properties, Advanced. In OE, however, you have to combine and
decode manually although it does seem to assemble the parts in mail.


I'd forgotten about that, thanks, but will leave well alone, don't want my
photos broken up. :-)
The files are broken up and then rejoined at the receivers end. Large
files can't be sent unless in packets or something like that. Agent
forte automatically rejoins the files and your first post came through
fine for me. It is not anything you did but the way of Usenet. That is
why OE as a newsreader is not the best thing.

The size problem occurs at the news or mail server, some are set to not
accept individual messages above a certain size. This limit has been raised
on a lot of servers now that broadband is so widespread.

Everything on the internet is sent in packets.
http://computer.howstuffworks.com/question525.htm

joevan wrote:
| The files are broken up and then rejoined at the receivers end. Large
| files can't be sent unless in packets or something like that. Agent
| forte automatically rejoins the files and your first post came through
| fine for me. It is not anything you did but the way of Usenet. That is
| why OE as a newsreader is not the best thing.

Thanks, SusieQ for shrinking the bigger-than-I-expected picture. I've
been meaning to do it, but ...

Anyway, the victim is a dwarf blue spruce and suffered the damage during
a relatively mild Washington winter. One fellow gardener suggested
cutting off the dead top and training one of the side branches to be the
new leader. He then asked how many years I wanted to spend watching the
recovery process. I replied about no longer buying green bananas and he
said, "Dig it out and replace it."

So unless somebody wants to offer some better hope, I think I'll get out
the shovel.

Rob







:


"Suzie-Q" wrote after
"Bob Hobden" wrote
Just a suggestion if you want help, I presume you have split one
photo into
5 bits and posted those seperately so we have to spend time in the
reconstitution of your photo.
Why not just post one reduced size photo of about 500Kb that we can
all see
instantly. If you need to show some detail to aid diagnosis then cut
and expand that bit and post that as another separate photo.

Thanks for that Suzie-Q.

The tree is badly damaged, although I don't think it's dead, the top
and growing tip certainly are.
You could cut off the dead bits and see what happens, probably just
expand outwards, but it will never look like it should.
Personally I'd either dig it up and treat it as a Bonsai or bin it and
replace.