This is a topic that has been discussed in crazy amounts on the mailing lists. What it boils down to is that the image is inserted at the same size, but when “Using Original”, you have the ability to resize the image to the original resolution without losing clarity on the image. The reason it is inserted at thumbnail size, though, or at least the argument goes, is that what if you were inserting a hi-res 1600×1200 image. It would not fit in the editor and would end up taking all kinds of energy from the processor.

This is a topic that has been discussed in crazy amounts on the mailing lists. What it boils down to is that the image is inserted at the same size, but when “Using Original”, you have the ability to resize the image to the original resolution without losing clarity on the image. The reason it is inserted at thumbnail size, though, or at least the argument goes, is that what if you were inserting a hi-res 1600×1200 image. It would not fit in the editor and would end up taking all kinds of energy from the processor.

This is a topic that has been discussed in crazy amounts on the mailing lists. What it boils down to is that the image is inserted at the same size, but when “Using Original”, you have the ability to resize the image to the original resolution without losing clarity on the image. The reason it is inserted at thumbnail size, though, or at least the argument goes, is that what if you were inserting a hi-res 1600×1200 image. It would not fit in the editor and would end up taking all kinds of energy from the processor.

This is a topic that has been discussed in crazy amounts on the mailing lists. What it boils down to is that the image is inserted at the same size, but when “Using Original”, you have the ability to resize the image to the original resolution without losing clarity on the image. The reason it is inserted at thumbnail size, though, or at least the argument goes, is that what if you were inserting a hi-res 1600×1200 image. It would not fit in the editor and would end up taking all kinds of energy from the processor.

This is a topic that has been discussed in crazy amounts on the mailing lists. What it boils down to is that the image is inserted at the same size, but when “Using Original”, you have the ability to resize the image to the original resolution without losing clarity on the image. The reason it is inserted at thumbnail size, though, or at least the argument goes, is that what if you were inserting a hi-res 1600×1200 image. It would not fit in the editor and would end up taking all kinds of energy from the processor.

This is a topic that has been discussed in crazy amounts on the mailing lists. What it boils down to is that the image is inserted at the same size, but when “Using Original”, you have the ability to resize the image to the original resolution without losing clarity on the image. The reason it is inserted at thumbnail size, though, or at least the argument goes, is that what if you were inserting a hi-res 1600×1200 image. It would not fit in the editor and would end up taking all kinds of energy from the processor.

This is a topic that has been discussed in crazy amounts on the mailing lists. What it boils down to is that the image is inserted at the same size, but when “Using Original”, you have the ability to resize the image to the original resolution without losing clarity on the image. The reason it is inserted at thumbnail size, though, or at least the argument goes, is that what if you were inserting a hi-res 1600×1200 image. It would not fit in the editor and would end up taking all kinds of energy from the processor.

Any news on the proper functionality for WP2.0 though? As I see it, the little ‘use thumbnail / no thumbnail’ image makes no difference – it just inserts it as a thumbnail anyway?

Surely this is a bug and will be fixed at some point in a dot upgrade…

Any news on the proper functionality for WP2.0 though? As I see it, the little ‘use thumbnail / no thumbnail’ image makes no difference – it just inserts it as a thumbnail anyway?

Surely this is a bug and will be fixed at some point in a dot upgrade…

Any news on the proper functionality for WP2.0 though? As I see it, the little ‘use thumbnail / no thumbnail’ image makes no difference – it just inserts it as a thumbnail anyway?

Surely this is a bug and will be fixed at some point in a dot upgrade…