9 Comments

Summary:

Test ink post # 2

  1. Not too bad, fairly legible and two colors even! :)

    Share
  2. Looks fairly good. I can’t wait until we can post in ink natively, i.e.; without it being an image file.

    Share
  3. Looking good James.

    Don’t know if it’s because the image is resized on the blog page but it is much smoother in the RSS feed.

    Share
  4. It’s the image resizing thing that TypePad does. If you click on the ink it opens a normal size window and looks really good.

    Share
  5. Looks pretty good really when not resized. I’m still not sold on blogging in ink for the sake of it and would not give up having my posts searchable – but where ink adds value (like including a diagram)this is a good way to do it.Well done: (So simple – Why didn’t I think of that!?!)

    Share
  6. The image itself is fine if you save it as a file and open it in an image program but it gets all pixillated when re-sized by TypePad. Try an image of writing that is about 2/3 of your previous width in pixels. It should look fine because it won’t need to be re-sized.

    Share
  7. Jeff Singfiel Wednesday, July 13, 2005

    I’m really liking ink for emphasis or effect, but I will always prefer reading normal text. I really speed read most blog entries and at the end of the day, it takes a lot more mental power to read ink than it does text. Keep experimenting though!

    Share
  8. The biggest drawback of this method for ink posting is the lack of search spidering by Google et. al. I can see using this method for short frivolous posts that I don’t make many of now because it’s a bit of a hassle using the TypePad editor. Plus this way I can do them offline and post later.

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post