Igor wrote: Of course, I used quality 100.
IMHO, you should never use quality 100 neither for thumbnails or large images.
Quality 90 is more than enough even for pixel peepers (read: photo nerds) photographers .
Having quality at 100:
- drastically enlarges file size
- makes your pages load slower
- doesn't show difference between 90 quality.
- gets you penalized by Google because of non-optimized photos.
So images should be 90 and thumbnails 85 of jpg quality
And related to your thumbnail size question: use whatever size fits your purpose or design.
There used to be some standards ages ago, but now you just use what you need.
Related to image size, if you want nice big images on the web, resize em proportionally and make that image height isn0t bigger than lets say 1200 or 1440 pixels, because no point of have images with huge width if they cannot fit by height into biggest screen.
My 5 cents :)
You can use these utilities for batch resizing: "Fast Stone image resizer" or "Irfan View"
or "R.I.O.T. Radical Image Optimization Tool", all free and does great job.
Regards
