Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.comp.software.firefox > #12807 > unrolled thread

Pasting photos in html emails

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.software.firefox

Contents

  Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-20 22:00 +0100
    Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2025-03-20 17:51 -0400
      Re: Pasting photos in html emails VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-03-20 17:36 -0500
        Re: Pasting photos in html emails bad sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> - 2025-03-21 06:15 -0400
          Re: Pasting photos in html emails VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-03-21 18:52 -0500
            Re: Pasting photos in html emails bad sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> - 2025-03-22 22:22 -0400
        Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-21 12:39 +0100
          Re: Pasting photos in html emails VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-03-21 18:57 -0500
            Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-22 15:32 +0100
        Re: Pasting photos in html emails Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-03-21 17:08 +0000
          Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-22 15:34 +0100
    Re: Pasting photos in html emails Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-03-21 06:40 +0000
      Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-21 12:41 +0100
        Re: Pasting photos in html emails Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-03-21 11:48 +0000
          Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-21 13:59 +0100
        Re: Pasting photos in html emails Retirednoguilt <HapilyRetired@fakeaddress.com> - 2025-03-21 09:27 -0400
          Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-21 15:07 +0100
            Re: Pasting photos in html emails Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2025-03-21 11:31 -0500
              Re: Pasting photos in html emails Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-03-21 17:17 +0000
                Re: Pasting photos in html emails Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2025-03-21 15:59 -0500
                  Re: Pasting photos in html emails Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-03-22 16:43 +0000
                    Re: Pasting photos in html emails Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2025-03-22 16:26 -0500
              Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-22 15:35 +0100
                Re: Pasting photos in html emails Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2025-03-22 16:40 -0500
                  Re: Pasting photos in html emails Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-03-23 19:50 +0000
                    Re: Pasting photos in html emails Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2025-03-24 01:36 -0500
                      Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-24 11:50 +0100
                      Re: Pasting photos in html emails Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-03-24 18:32 +0000
          Re: Pasting photos in html emails Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-03-21 11:33 -0400
            Re: Pasting photos in html emails Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-03-21 17:24 +0000
              Re: Pasting photos in html emails Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-03-22 16:47 +0000
                Re: Pasting photos in html emails Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-03-22 13:31 -0400
                Re: Pasting photos in html emails Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2025-03-22 16:10 -0500
                  Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-22 23:50 +0100
    Re: Pasting photos in html emails Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-03-21 08:17 -0400
      Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-21 15:12 +0100
        Re: Pasting photos in html emails Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-03-21 11:30 -0400
          Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-03-22 15:40 +0100
    Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-27 14:32 +0200
      Re: Pasting photos in html emails knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-05-27 09:34 -0400
        Re: Pasting photos in html emails "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-05-27 16:07 +0200

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#12843

On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 15:59:12 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

[snip]

>>BTW, I use "address reservation" for most devices. It prevents a lot of
>>network problems.
> 
> I tend to use static IPs for everything except the cell phones. Those
> have the random MAC feature turned on, so they get an address from the
> DHCP pool.

The difference between "address reservation" and static is that you make 
the setting on your router (and leave the device itself on automatic). 
Either will work, but I find setting them all on the router to be easier 
to manage. I can look at the router settings to see which IPs are 
available.

-- 
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"If the factory pays taxes and the church does not, it follows that the
church will some day own the factory." -- Lemuel K. Washburn, Is The
Bible Worth Reading And Other Essays

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12850

On 22 Mar 2025 16:43:33 GMT, Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> wrote:

>On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 15:59:12 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>>>BTW, I use "address reservation" for most devices. It prevents a lot of
>>>network problems.
>> 
>> I tend to use static IPs for everything except the cell phones. Those
>> have the random MAC feature turned on, so they get an address from the
>> DHCP pool.
>
>The difference between "address reservation" and static is that you make 
>the setting on your router (and leave the device itself on automatic). 
>Either will work, but I find setting them all on the router to be easier 
>to manage. I can look at the router settings to see which IPs are 
>available.

For me, static IPs are easier, especially since my work laptop and my
desktop PC need to simultaneously access multiple virtual hosts on
multiple VMs, each of which are on different subnets. I used to use a
virtual router to make those connections, (which meant having yet
another VM running all of the time), but if I simply configure static
IPs on the laptop and desktop I can go back in and add as many
additional IPs as I need on each of those subnets. You can't (easily) do
that with DHCP. The number fluctuates, but I tend to have 12-15 IPs
configured on the laptop and about 10 on the desktop. If I went back to
DHCP on those two PCs I'd have to put up with running a virtual router
again or adding a mess of static routes to my physical router, which
would work when I'm home but would fail when I'm on site with a client.

By the way, if you need a virtual router in your environment I can
recommend dd-wrt and/or pfSense. The pfSense device also makes an
awesome firewall, load balancer, DNS resolver, DHCP server, and much
more. Both dd-wrt and pfSense can run on dedicated hardware, but I
prefer the virtual editions. No cabling to deal with.

Another thing about address reservation, if I swap out the gateway
router or do a factory reset, all of those mappings are gone. With
static IPs, everything just continues to work. Like you said, both ways
should work for most people, but I have additional requirements that
don't work well with DHCP and address reservation.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12839

On 2025-03-21 17:31, Char Jackson wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 15:07:38 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On 2025-03-21 14:27, Retirednoguilt wrote:
> 
>>> I usually download the image to my PC to make sure that it's not huge.
>>> If it is, I use an image resizer (that installs into my right click drop
>>> down menu when I've clicked on an image file) to choose the size I want
>>> to attach to the email.  See:
>>> https://github.com/bricelam/ImageResizer/releases
>>
>> Sure. I do that if I know the other person wants a copy. That's not the
>> case, they prefer a link. It doesn't matter if it dies in a month.
>>
>>
>> I could use links to my own server, but Telefónica did something to my
>> router and now they don't work.
> 
> That's why I never use the router provided by the ISP. I leave it in its
> box and put it on a closet shelf, preferring instead to use my own
> router.

The configuration of the ISP provided router is very complex and not 
documented. It serves internet, phone and TV.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12851

On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 15:35:55 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

>On 2025-03-21 17:31, Char Jackson wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 15:07:38 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
>> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2025-03-21 14:27, Retirednoguilt wrote:
>> 
>>>> I usually download the image to my PC to make sure that it's not huge.
>>>> If it is, I use an image resizer (that installs into my right click drop
>>>> down menu when I've clicked on an image file) to choose the size I want
>>>> to attach to the email.  See:
>>>> https://github.com/bricelam/ImageResizer/releases
>>>
>>> Sure. I do that if I know the other person wants a copy. That's not the
>>> case, they prefer a link. It doesn't matter if it dies in a month.
>>>
>>>
>>> I could use links to my own server, but Telefónica did something to my
>>> router and now they don't work.
>> 
>> That's why I never use the router provided by the ISP. I leave it in its
>> box and put it on a closet shelf, preferring instead to use my own
>> router.
>
>The configuration of the ISP provided router is very complex and not 
>documented. It serves internet, phone and TV.

It can't be that complex, can it? Internet, phone, and TV services are
well understood these days. Anyway, that's probably in the eye of the
beholder. Google says people can generally use their own router with
Telefónica, but I don't know the details.

When I switched to a fiber ISP a few years ago, they brought in a router
from their truck and told me I had to use it because nothing else would
work. As soon as he left, I swapped in my own router. Naturally,
everything continued to work, but when I've called to report an outage
they start the conversation with, "We're having trouble accessing your
router..." LOL Any fool can look at the ONT and see that the Broadband
light is off, blinking, or red, indicating that the issue is not inside
my home. We get there eventually, but it initially confuses them because
of where their support script starts.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12859

On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 16:40:59 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

[snip]

> When I switched to a fiber ISP a few years ago, they brought in a router
> from their truck and told me I had to use it because nothing else would
> work. As soon as he left, I swapped in my own router. Naturally,
> everything continued to work, but when I've called to report an outage
> they start the conversation with, "We're having trouble accessing your
> router..." LOL Any fool can look at the ONT and see that the Broadband
> light is off, blinking, or red, indicating that the issue is not inside
> my home. We get there eventually, but it initially confuses them because
> of where their support script starts.

I insisted on using my own router, which apparently works here
I've had fiber for a couple of years. I insisted on using my own router, 
which apparently works here, even with phone service, which connects 
directly to the POTS1* jack on the ONT. Usually, when there's an outage, 
they already know and send a SMS.

The last time that didn't happen and I tried to report it on the website. 
You have to go through an "AI" that's not very intelligent. It ignored my 
report of the problem (which included rebooting the ONT, which didn't help 
anything), made me select from a list (the closest thing was "no 
internet"), told be to reboot my router (which was unlikely to help, 
considering my phone was out too , and that connects directly to the ONT), 
then old me to reset the ONT (which I had tried a couple of times and 
ALREADY TOLD THE *****). Then it tried so sell mt some home service. After 
that it went into a loop, repeating the other things I just listed. 

* - The installer was nice and I didn't get into trouble by knowing what 
"POTS" is.

-- 
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Why be born again, when you can just grow up?"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12860

On 23 Mar 2025 19:50:14 GMT, Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> wrote:

>On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 16:40:59 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> When I switched to a fiber ISP a few years ago, they brought in a router
>> from their truck and told me I had to use it because nothing else would
>> work. As soon as he left, I swapped in my own router. Naturally,
>> everything continued to work, but when I've called to report an outage
>> they start the conversation with, "We're having trouble accessing your
>> router..." LOL Any fool can look at the ONT and see that the Broadband
>> light is off, blinking, or red, indicating that the issue is not inside
>> my home. We get there eventually, but it initially confuses them because
>> of where their support script starts.
>
>I insisted on using my own router, which apparently works here
>I've had fiber for a couple of years. I insisted on using my own router, 
>which apparently works here, even with phone service, which connects 
>directly to the POTS1* jack on the ONT. Usually, when there's an outage, 
>they already know and send a SMS.
>
>The last time that didn't happen and I tried to report it on the website. 
>You have to go through an "AI" that's not very intelligent. It ignored my 
>report of the problem (which included rebooting the ONT, which didn't help 
>anything), made me select from a list (the closest thing was "no 
>internet"), told be to reboot my router (which was unlikely to help, 
>considering my phone was out too , and that connects directly to the ONT), 
>then old me to reset the ONT (which I had tried a couple of times and 
>ALREADY TOLD THE *****). Then it tried so sell mt some home service. After 
>that it went into a loop, repeating the other things I just listed. 
>
>* - The installer was nice and I didn't get into trouble by knowing what 
>"POTS" is.

That sounds a lot like AT&T, but I think all of the bigger telecoms
sound like that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12861

On 2025-03-24 07:36, Char Jackson wrote:
> On 23 Mar 2025 19:50:14 GMT, Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 16:40:59 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> When I switched to a fiber ISP a few years ago, they brought in a router
>>> from their truck and told me I had to use it because nothing else would
>>> work. As soon as he left, I swapped in my own router. Naturally,
>>> everything continued to work, but when I've called to report an outage
>>> they start the conversation with, "We're having trouble accessing your
>>> router..." LOL Any fool can look at the ONT and see that the Broadband
>>> light is off, blinking, or red, indicating that the issue is not inside
>>> my home. We get there eventually, but it initially confuses them because
>>> of where their support script starts.
>>
>> I insisted on using my own router, which apparently works here
>> I've had fiber for a couple of years. I insisted on using my own router,
>> which apparently works here, even with phone service, which connects
>> directly to the POTS1* jack on the ONT. Usually, when there's an outage,
>> they already know and send a SMS.
>>
>> The last time that didn't happen and I tried to report it on the website.
>> You have to go through an "AI" that's not very intelligent. It ignored my
>> report of the problem (which included rebooting the ONT, which didn't help
>> anything), made me select from a list (the closest thing was "no
>> internet"), told be to reboot my router (which was unlikely to help,
>> considering my phone was out too , and that connects directly to the ONT),
>> then old me to reset the ONT (which I had tried a couple of times and
>> ALREADY TOLD THE *****). Then it tried so sell mt some home service. After
>> that it went into a loop, repeating the other things I just listed.
>>
>> * - The installer was nice and I didn't get into trouble by knowing what
>> "POTS" is.
> 
> That sounds a lot like AT&T, but I think all of the bigger telecoms
> sound like that.

At Telefónica, Spain, it is somewhat like that with the phone robot. The 
human, depends on your luck. But then there is also a web forum, which 
is slow but the staff is more knowledgeable.

That said, it is surprising that the advice to reboot the router or the 
ONT works very often :-D

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12862

On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 01:36:33 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

> On 23 Mar 2025 19:50:14 GMT, Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> wrote:

[snip]

>>* - The installer was nice and I didn't get into trouble by knowing what
>>"POTS" is.
> 
> That sounds a lot like AT&T, but I think all of the bigger telecoms
> sound like that.

Its Frontier (phone system was formerly Verizon).

-- 
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Faith is a cop-out. It is intellectual bankruptcy. If the only way you
can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it
can't be taken on its own merits." Dan Barker

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12823

On 3/21/2025 9:27 AM, Retirednoguilt wrote:

> 
> I usually download the image to my PC to make sure that it's not huge.
> If it is, I use an image resizer (that installs into my right click drop
> down menu when I've clicked on an image file) to choose the size I want
> to attach to the email. 

    I would do that, too, though most people wouldn't
know how. I sometimes get gigantic pictures from
  friends with iPhones. They know how to click, "Send
this picture via email", but they have no idea of how
graphics works on computers or of what size image
they're sending.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12828

On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 11:33:36 -0400, Newyana2 wrote:

[snip]

>     I would do that, too, though most people wouldn't
> know how. I sometimes get gigantic pictures from
>   friends with iPhones. They know how to click, "Send
> this picture via email", but they have no idea of how graphics works on
> computers or of what size image they're sending.

I have my own website, which makes it easy to send pictures as links. For 
example, this picture of my "BBC keyboard assistant, self-installing 
retail version":

http://notstupid.us/IMG_0766

-- 
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"They are not jackbooted Nazi thugs. They are merely German policemen in
spiffy uniforms here to help us." - Vichy government (1941 - 1945)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12844

On 21 Mar 2025 17:24:25 GMT, Mark Lloyd wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 11:33:36 -0400, Newyana2 wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
>>     I would do that, too, though most people wouldn't
>> know how. I sometimes get gigantic pictures from
>>   friends with iPhones. They know how to click, "Send
>> this picture via email", but they have no idea of how graphics works on
>> computers or of what size image they're sending.
> 
> I have my own website, which makes it easy to send pictures as links.
> For example, this picture of my "BBC keyboard assistant, self-installing
> retail version":
> 
> http://notstupid.us/IMG_0766

And several people will now know that "BBC" here means Big Black Cat 
(named Retail).

-- 
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"If the factory pays taxes and the church does not, it follows that the
church will some day own the factory." -- Lemuel K. Washburn, Is The
Bible Worth Reading And Other Essays

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12845

On 3/22/2025 12:47 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

>>
>> http://notstupid.us/IMG_0766
> 
> And several people will now know that "BBC" here means Big Black Cat
> (named Retail).
> 

  I wish BBC stood for, "We decided to start sending the US the
good stuff." I'm so tired of PBS showing nothing but homemade
wokist documentaries and half-baked British soap operas. What
do PBS spend their money on? Maybe it's to pay Neil DeGrasse
Tyson for his circus show of special effects, pretending to be
a science documentary.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12849

On 22 Mar 2025 16:47:57 GMT, Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> wrote:

>On 21 Mar 2025 17:24:25 GMT, Mark Lloyd wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 11:33:36 -0400, Newyana2 wrote:
>> 
>> [snip]
>> 
>>>     I would do that, too, though most people wouldn't
>>> know how. I sometimes get gigantic pictures from
>>>   friends with iPhones. They know how to click, "Send
>>> this picture via email", but they have no idea of how graphics works on
>>> computers or of what size image they're sending.
>> 
>> I have my own website, which makes it easy to send pictures as links.
>> For example, this picture of my "BBC keyboard assistant, self-installing
>> retail version":
>> 
>> http://notstupid.us/IMG_0766
>
>And several people will now know that "BBC" here means Big Black Cat 
>(named Retail).

There's a guy in my neighborhood who put a big black pottery rooster in
his front yard a while back. Someone from the HOA apparently took notice
and he received a letter directing him to remove it. He made the letter
public, on our Facebook group, primarily telling them that it's not a
rooster but rather a cock, as in a big black cock (BBC). The HOA replied
on the public Facebook group, directing him to remove the BBC from his
yard. It's been at least a year now and it's still there.

I guess a BBC can be many things.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12853

On 2025-03-22 22:10, Char Jackson wrote:
> I guess a BBC can be many things.

Bodas, Bautizos, y Comuniones (Weddings, Baptisms and Communions). 
Expression used by singers and other entertainers doing the BBC circle 
("I sing on the BBC", they say).

:-D

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12817

On 3/20/2025 5:00 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Sometimes I send html emails to friends with summaries of some news for 
> chatting on them, and I add photos. Normally, the photos are links, so 
> the email weight is small.
> 
> Take this article, for instance (using firefox): 
> <https://ubuntuhandbook.org/index.php/2025/03/photogimp-updated-to-help-switching-from-photoshtop-to-gimp-3-0/> 
> 
> 
> I click on the first photo, then right click on the menu, and select 
> "Copy Image". Then on the email, I simply do ctrl-v and paste the photo.
> 
> But since recently, this has a twist. The email weights one megabyte. On 
> TB, I double click on the image, and Image location contains 
> "…8EtAFbFgqOrgAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==". If I save 
> the email, it has 1 megabyte.
> 
> The remedy is to delete this line, go to firefox, right click on the 
> image, select "copy image link", and on TB paste that link in the "Image 
> Location" field of the photo 
> (<https://ubuntuhandbook.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/gimp3-patched.webp>). 
> Now when saving the email it weights just 3.5 KB.
> 
> This was not happening some time ago, I always got the photo links. Now 
> I have to be careful when sending photos that I don't get the heavy 
> version.
> 
> Why, what is going on?
> 

     It's always worked that way. Copy Image puts the image on
the Clipboard.You should never embed remote links in an HTML
email. Most people will have them blocked, anyway. If I remember
correctly, that's standard in TB. That kind of linking is mostly used
by commercial entities trying to look official, or by scammers trying
to look like an official bank email, or by spyware companies like
Constant Contact, trying to track each time you open an email and
how far down you read.

    Either embed the image, attach the image as a file, or simply
paste the link. Embedding has also become awkward. Apple seems
to have different protocols. Other companies also butcher the
basic email protocols. MSWord creates an email full of "MSO"
HTML nonsense. Increasingly, email arrives with no text section, or
a corrupted text section. Recently I was faced with an email
from a passport photo service. The passport photos didn't show
as either attached or inline. I had to save the source code and
convert the base-64 encoding. And if someone reads their email as
plain text (which I do for security) then they won't see your pictures.
They may or may not then see them as attachments.

    The old days of attaching EXEs and writing HTML emails are
gone due to security concerns. Email should be plain text.

  All of this has nothing to do with
Firefox. Copy Image has always meant putting the image on the
Clipboard. Copy Image Link has always meant to put the URL on
the Clipboard.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12821

On 2025-03-21 13:17, Newyana2 wrote:
> On 3/20/2025 5:00 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Sometimes I send html emails to friends with summaries of some news 
>> for chatting on them, and I add photos. Normally, the photos are 
>> links, so the email weight is small.
>>
>> Take this article, for instance (using firefox): <https:// 
>> ubuntuhandbook.org/index.php/2025/03/photogimp-updated-to-help- 
>> switching-from-photoshtop-to-gimp-3-0/>
>>
>> I click on the first photo, then right click on the menu, and select 
>> "Copy Image". Then on the email, I simply do ctrl-v and paste the photo.
>>
>> But since recently, this has a twist. The email weights one megabyte. 
>> On TB, I double click on the image, and Image location contains 
>> "…8EtAFbFgqOrgAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==". If I 
>> save the email, it has 1 megabyte.
>>
>> The remedy is to delete this line, go to firefox, right click on the 
>> image, select "copy image link", and on TB paste that link in the 
>> "Image Location" field of the photo (<https://ubuntuhandbook.org/wp- 
>> content/uploads/2025/03/gimp3-patched.webp>). Now when saving the 
>> email it weights just 3.5 KB.
>>
>> This was not happening some time ago, I always got the photo links. 
>> Now I have to be careful when sending photos that I don't get the 
>> heavy version.
>>
>> Why, what is going on?
>>
> 
>      It's always worked that way. Copy Image puts the image on
> the Clipboard.You should never embed remote links in an HTML
> email. Most people will have them blocked, anyway. 

Not the case. My friends prefer a link that doesn't use space. And I 
have been doing this for about two years, works fine. It doesn't matter 
if the link doesn't work next month.

Embedding they certainly do not like, uses space.
Pasting the link is cumbersome, they have to click on it.

It doesn't matter that marketers abuse the system. They know the photo 
links come from me.


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12822

On 3/21/2025 10:12 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2025-03-21 13:17, Newyana2 wrote:
>> On 3/20/2025 5:00 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Sometimes I send html emails to friends with summaries of some news 
>>> for chatting on them, and I add photos. Normally, the photos are 
>>> links, so the email weight is small.
>>>
>>> Take this article, for instance (using firefox): <https:// 
>>> ubuntuhandbook.org/index.php/2025/03/photogimp-updated-to-help- 
>>> switching-from-photoshtop-to-gimp-3-0/>
>>>
>>> I click on the first photo, then right click on the menu, and select 
>>> "Copy Image". Then on the email, I simply do ctrl-v and paste the photo.
>>>
>>> But since recently, this has a twist. The email weights one megabyte. 
>>> On TB, I double click on the image, and Image location contains 
>>> "…8EtAFbFgqOrgAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==". If I 
>>> save the email, it has 1 megabyte.
>>>
>>> The remedy is to delete this line, go to firefox, right click on the 
>>> image, select "copy image link", and on TB paste that link in the 
>>> "Image Location" field of the photo (<https://ubuntuhandbook.org/wp- 
>>> content/uploads/2025/03/gimp3-patched.webp>). Now when saving the 
>>> email it weights just 3.5 KB.
>>>
>>> This was not happening some time ago, I always got the photo links. 
>>> Now I have to be careful when sending photos that I don't get the 
>>> heavy version.
>>>
>>> Why, what is going on?
>>>
>>
>>      It's always worked that way. Copy Image puts the image on
>> the Clipboard.You should never embed remote links in an HTML
>> email. Most people will have them blocked, anyway. 
> 
> Not the case. My friends prefer a link that doesn't use space. And I 
> have been doing this for about two years, works fine. It doesn't matter 
> if the link doesn't work next month.
> 
> Embedding they certainly do not like, uses space.
> Pasting the link is cumbersome, they have to click on it.
> 
> It doesn't matter that marketers abuse the system. They know the photo 
> links come from me.
> 

   Then just paste in the link. You don't need to make it
a remote link in the email. If you keep doing it that way
it may work, but you should be aware that email clients
now default to blocking remote images from loading. So
some people may not see the images.

   I wonder about your friends. They find it tedious to click
a link? Why do they bother to breathe? Or could it be
that they don't expect your links to be interesting enough
to click? Nothing personal, but if I had the slightest expectation
that someone was sending me something interesting, I'd
have no hesitation loading it to see. So I have to wonder
about your links. I have friends
who like to send things like the joke of the week. I never look
at their stuff, whether links or attachments, because I'm
not interested in seeing a dog using an electric razor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12841

On 2025-03-21 16:30, Newyana2 wrote:
> On 3/21/2025 10:12 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2025-03-21 13:17, Newyana2 wrote:
>>> On 3/20/2025 5:00 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Sometimes I send html emails to friends with summaries of some news 
>>>> for chatting on them, and I add photos. Normally, the photos are 
>>>> links, so the email weight is small.
>>>>
>>>> Take this article, for instance (using firefox): <https:// 
>>>> ubuntuhandbook.org/index.php/2025/03/photogimp-updated-to-help- 
>>>> switching-from-photoshtop-to-gimp-3-0/>
>>>>
>>>> I click on the first photo, then right click on the menu, and select 
>>>> "Copy Image". Then on the email, I simply do ctrl-v and paste the 
>>>> photo.
>>>>
>>>> But since recently, this has a twist. The email weights one 
>>>> megabyte. On TB, I double click on the image, and Image location 
>>>> contains "… 
>>>> 8EtAFbFgqOrgAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==". If I save the email, it has 1 
>>>> megabyte.
>>>>
>>>> The remedy is to delete this line, go to firefox, right click on the 
>>>> image, select "copy image link", and on TB paste that link in the 
>>>> "Image Location" field of the photo (<https://ubuntuhandbook.org/wp- 
>>>> content/uploads/2025/03/gimp3-patched.webp>). Now when saving the 
>>>> email it weights just 3.5 KB.
>>>>
>>>> This was not happening some time ago, I always got the photo links. 
>>>> Now I have to be careful when sending photos that I don't get the 
>>>> heavy version.
>>>>
>>>> Why, what is going on?
>>>>
>>>
>>>      It's always worked that way. Copy Image puts the image on
>>> the Clipboard.You should never embed remote links in an HTML
>>> email. Most people will have them blocked, anyway. 
>>
>> Not the case. My friends prefer a link that doesn't use space. And I 
>> have been doing this for about two years, works fine. It doesn't 
>> matter if the link doesn't work next month.
>>
>> Embedding they certainly do not like, uses space.
>> Pasting the link is cumbersome, they have to click on it.
>>
>> It doesn't matter that marketers abuse the system. They know the photo 
>> links come from me.
>>
> 
>    Then just paste in the link. You don't need to make it
> a remote link in the email. If you keep doing it that way
> it may work, but you should be aware that email clients
> now default to blocking remote images from loading. So
> some people may not see the images.
> 
>    I wonder about your friends. They find it tedious to click
> a link? Why do they bother to breathe? Or could it be
> that they don't expect your links to be interesting enough
> to click? Nothing personal, but if I had the slightest expectation
> that someone was sending me something interesting, I'd
> have no hesitation loading it to see. So I have to wonder
> about your links. I have friends
> who like to send things like the joke of the week. I never look
> at their stuff, whether links or attachments, because I'm
> not interested in seeing a dog using an electric razor.

The sites are often in a language they don't speak. I email a translated 
summary. If they are then interested, they can open the site and click 
on some automatic translation tool. Glancing at an email with a photo is 
quicker.


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13570

On 2025-03-20 22:00, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Sometimes I send html emails to friends with summaries of some news for 
> chatting on them, and I add photos. Normally, the photos are links, so 
> the email weight is small.
> 
> Take this article, for instance (using firefox): <https:// 
> ubuntuhandbook.org/index.php/2025/03/photogimp-updated-to-help- 
> switching-from-photoshtop-to-gimp-3-0/>
> 
> I click on the first photo, then right click on the menu, and select 
> "Copy Image". Then on the email, I simply do ctrl-v and paste the photo.
> 
> But since recently, this has a twist. The email weights one megabyte. On 
> TB, I double click on the image, and Image location contains 
> "…8EtAFbFgqOrgAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==". If I save 
> the email, it has 1 megabyte.
> 
> The remedy is to delete this line, go to firefox, right click on the 
> image, select "copy image link", and on TB paste that link in the "Image 
> Location" field of the photo (<https://ubuntuhandbook.org/wp-content/ 
> uploads/2025/03/gimp3-patched.webp>). Now when saving the email it 
> weights just 3.5 KB.
> 
> This was not happening some time ago, I always got the photo links. Now 
> I have to be careful when sending photos that I don't get the heavy 
> version.
> 
> Why, what is going on?
> 

Well, it is working again. I get the html link. At least on my laptop.

<https://ubuntuhandbook.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/gimp3-patched-700x381.webp>

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13572

On 05/27/2025 8:32 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2025-03-20 22:00, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Sometimes I send html emails to friends with summaries of some news 
>> for chatting on them, and I add photos. Normally, the photos are 
>> links, so the email weight is small.
>>
>> Take this article, for instance (using firefox): <https:// 
>> ubuntuhandbook.org/index.php/2025/03/photogimp-updated-to-help- 
>> switching-from-photoshtop-to-gimp-3-0/>
>>
>> I click on the first photo, then right click on the menu, and select 
>> "Copy Image". Then on the email, I simply do ctrl-v and paste the photo.
>>
>> But since recently, this has a twist. The email weights one megabyte. 
>> On TB, I double click on the image, and Image location contains 
>> "…8EtAFbFgqOrgAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==". If I 
>> save the email, it has 1 megabyte.
>>
>> The remedy is to delete this line, go to firefox, right click on the 
>> image, select "copy image link", and on TB paste that link in the 
>> "Image Location" field of the photo (<https://ubuntuhandbook.org/wp- 
>> content/ uploads/2025/03/gimp3-patched.webp>). Now when saving the 
>> email it weights just 3.5 KB.
>>
>> This was not happening some time ago, I always got the photo links. 
>> Now I have to be careful when sending photos that I don't get the 
>> heavy version.
>>
>> Why, what is going on?
>>
> 
> Well, it is working again. I get the html link. At least on my laptop.
> 
> <https://ubuntuhandbook.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/gimp3- 
> patched-700x381.webp>
> 
You can just drag and drop images into the Compose window.   When you 
are hovering over the window an there is an option to paste it inline or 
as an attachment

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.software.firefox

csiph-web