Why can't I send emails with inline images?
Robbie Hatley
Greetings, group. I've been trying to send an HTML email to a friend
with images inserted inline with the text. What I want is something
like this:
============== BEGIN EXAMPLE 1 ======================
Howdy, Frank. I see the problem with your web page. On my browser,
your title bar looks like THIS:
--------------------------------------
| |
| (image) |
| |
--------------------------------------
============= END EXAMPLE 1 =========================
However, what the recipient actually *gets* is THIS:
============== BEGIN EXAMPLE 2 ======================
Howdy, Frank. I see the problem with your web page. On my browser,
your title bar looks like THIS:
DSC01935.JPG
============= END EXAMPLE 2 =========================
No image. Just the name of the file as a text snippet.
So, what's going on here? I've been looking all over
for settings that control graphics inlining. I have
it enabled, as far as I can see. "Compose messages as
HTML" is also enabled. I can create emails with images
inline. *BUT*, when I send them, something is stripping
the images out. Anyone have any ideas?
--
Perplexed,
Robbie Hatley
Stanton, CA, USA
lonewolf at well dot com
www dot well dot com slant tilde lonewolf slant
Keith Nuttle
There is an option to show attachments inline. It is in View --->
"Display Attachments inline"
It should be noted that it will not appear to be working as you compose
a message, but when you access the message after it is sent from the
sent folder they will appear as you planned.d
Marcel Stör
> I can create emails with images
> inline. *BUT*, when I send them, something is stripping
> the images out.
Really? Could it be that this is an issue in the recipient's email
client? Does "Frank" use Thunderbird?
I believe that the email TB sends is correct.
Cheers,
Marcel
--
Marcel St�r, http://www.frightanic.com
Couchsurfing: http://www.couchsurfing.com/people/marcelstoer
Skype: marcelstoer
O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org
-> I kill Google Groups posts: http://improve-usenet.org
JoeS
> On 25.05.10 23:26, Robbie Hatley wrote:
>> I can create emails with images
>> inline. *BUT*, when I send them, something is stripping
>> the images out.
>
> Really? Could it be that this is an issue in the recipient's email client? Does "Frank" use Thunderbird?
>
> I believe that the email TB sends is correct.
>
> Cheers,
> Marcel
>
(that is, those that are embedded with Insert>>Image) were defaulted to content-disposition attachment.
This causes no problem when viewed with Thunderbird, but some user agents, notably Gmail, will just show
those images as attachments.
There is a hidden pref that you might want to change.
mail.content_disposition_type If you set this to "2" (no quotes) content-disposition inline will be sent.
I'm not completely sure how this will affect attachments that are actually sent as attachment.
Give it a try. Hope this helps.
--
JoeS Using TB3
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Thunderbird_3.0_-_New_Features_and_Changes
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Thunderbird/Thunderbird_Binaries
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Breakpad#Using_the_application_to_view_crash_reports
Robbie Hatley
On 2010-05-25 2:42 PM, Keith Nuttle wrote:
> There is an option to show attachments inline. It is in View --->
> "Display Attachments inline"
>
> It should be noted that it will not appear to be working as you compose
> a message, but when you access the message after it is sent from the
> sent folder they will appear as you planned.
No. Quite the opposite! The emails, as I compose them in the
WYSIWYG HTML email composition windo, look correct, with the
images nicely inlined. However, after sending, when I look in
the "Sent" folder, the email size is "1K", which is obviously
not right (should be 800K or so if several photos inlined).
And when I open the saved copy, there are no images (which
I already knew from the "1K" size).
Also, if I CC the email to a couple of my other addresses in
addition to the main recipient, those copies all have the
inline photos missing as well.
So, what is stripping them out?
(I already tried disabling my virus scanner in case it was
interfering, so that's not it.)
--
Very puzzled,
Robbie Hatley
On 2010-05-25 3:14 PM, Marcel St�r wrote:
> Could it be that this is an issue in the recipient's email
> client?
No. The photos never get sent.
> I believe that the email TB sends is correct.
No, it does not. The email which TB sends is about 800 times
too small, for one thing. 99.99% of its content is missing,
because something in Thunderbird is stripping out any inlined
photos.
Note that I *can* send photos as attachments, and the copy in
the "Sent" folder is then about 800KB instead of 1KB, and it
shows the attached photos inlined at the bottom.
But *attachments* are not the same as *inlining*, whether viewed
"inline" or not. "Inlining" means being able to insert photos
at locations of my desire within the text of an email.
Thunderbird *claims* that it allows users to do that. But when
I try to send such emails, TB strips out the inlined photos.
So, why is inlining not working?
Is this just a problem on my setup?
Or is this yet another TB3 bug?
Is there some obscure hidden setting in the "config" mess for this?
Something called "88704.strp.inln.pht_ggvq86", undoubtedly?
It would figure.
--
Cheers,
Robbie Hatley
I'd written of TB's infuriating disallowal of inline
images:
> Is there some obscure hidden setting in the "config" mess for this?
> Something called "88704.strp.inln.pht_ggvq86", undoubtedly?
> It would figure.
Then a few minutes later, JoeS wrote:
> There is a hidden pref that you might want to change.
> mail.content_disposition_type If you set this to "2" (no quotes)
> content-disposition inline will be sent.
Figures. Sigh.
Ok, lets try that......
::: changes mail.content_disposition_type from 1 to 2 :::
::: exits TB :::
::: restarts TB :::
::: sends another email with inline images :::
Nope, images are still being stripped, so that aint it.
Is *ANYONE* here able to send inline images in emails to themselves
successfully using Mozilla Thunderbird 3.0.4 ???
And I do mean *INLINE IMAGES*, *NOT* "attachments viewed inline",
which is something totally different and completely unrelated,
so don't bait-n-switch on me, please. A couple of the responders
to this thread have already done that, and as always it's not
helpful to anyone in the slightest. If it's a bug, then just
admit it's a bug, instead of weaseling in an attempt to
"placate the complainer" or "save face". Thanks.
--
Still very perplexed,
Wing
Yes, I just did on my laptop running WinXP SP3, Tb 3.0.4. Image file is
a jpg file and it displays as inline, not attachment.
Tb 3.0.4 just has 3 add-ons - Enigmail, Lightning, & QuickNote.
HTH.
--
Wing
Charlie
> On 5/25/2010 4:38 PM, Robbie Hatley wrote:
>
>
> > And I do mean *INLINE IMAGES*, *NOT* "attachments viewed inline",
> > which is something totally different and completely unrelated,
> > so don't bait-n-switch on me, please. A couple of the responders
> > to this thread have already done that, and as always it's not
> > helpful to anyone in the slightest. If it's a bug, then just
> > admit it's a bug, instead of weaseling in an attempt to
> > "placate the complainer" or "save face". Thanks.
Look. IMHO, no one has been doing "bait-n-switch," "placate the
complainer," or "save face." Nor weaseling or trying to be
unhelpful. Remember it's free advice and folks here are interested in
helping. Some may have read your question too quickly and jumped to a
conclusion, but hey it's free advice and you're welcome to a full
refund at any time. Over the years, it has seemed to me that the
supplicants who are able to remain more civil and uncomplaining
through the process are more likely to eventually get their problems
solved. Sanctimonious preaching over; on to the question.
Your message with inline image that looks fine in composition, but is
sent missing the images. My guess is that it is somehow being sent as
"plain text." Take a look at Menu-->Tools-->Options-->Composition--
>Configure text format behavior-->Send options. Try "Send the message
in both plain text and HTML" in the pull down.
Let us know if that helps,
Charlie
Peter C
Are you sure that your friend's entry in the address book is set up
with "Prefers to receive messages in HTML"? (No entry equates to
"plain text.") If user is not identified as preferring HTML, TB will
convert the message to text and you'll get the phenomenon you're
experiencing.
Peter
Jill
David E. Ross
and sent through the Internet as attachments. That is because the
message itself is ASCII (even if HTML-formatted) while the images are
binary.
If the recipient receives HTML-formatted messages, the message and
images are then recombined for display. If the recipient has set his or
her E-mail application to receive only ASCII-formatted messages, the
images will remain as attachments and not appear inline.
--
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>
Anyone who thinks government owns a monopoly on inefficient, obstructive
bureaucracy has obviously never worked for a large corporation.
� 1997 by David E. Ross
Bob Henson
then allow me to forward received HTML messages with inline images
correctly? It's the main reason that I have to use Outlook for most of
my mail, because Outlook handles HTML mail correctly and forwards
messages exactly as they are received. Despite the hassle, I'd happily
change all the many entries if it will work - then I won't need Outlook
at all.
--
Bob
Tetbury, Gloucestershire, UK
I went for a medical and asked the doctor, "How do I stand?" He said,
"That's what puzzles me too!"
David E. Ross
attachments even for HTML-formatted messages. When the messages and
attachments reach their recipients, they are recombined but only if the
recipient accepts HTML-formatted messages. If the recipient has set
options to receive all messages as ASCII-formatted, the images remain as
separate attachments.
There is nothing you can do with ANY E-mail application to force a
recipient to see your message as HTML-formatted if the recipient has set
options for ASCII.
Mike Easter
> On Thursday, May 27, 2010 11:37:34 PM UTC+12, Peter C wrote:
>> On May 26, 10:15 am, Charlie <w.char...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 5/25/2010 4:38 PM, Robbie Hatley wrote:
> Changing the address book set up from no entry to HTML worked for me
> - Thanks
it sometimes leads to current day replies to an ancient historical
exchange, in this case 2 1/3 years old.
Some people like to use html for all their mail messages because they
like how the message looks to them when they are composing it, without
realizing that the appearance of the message during such composition
isn't necessarily at all the appearance that the recipient will see.
IMO, one should /not/ send html routinely to people who you don't know
how their agent is going to render the missive -- but instead one should
only html mail to those recipients for whom it has been established
somehow are actually /wanting/ the html mail and are able to render it
in a manner consistent with the 'wishes' of the sender (and recipient).
In that scenario, I think the default mode should be plaintext until
'proven otherwise'.
As a mail recipient who receives mail from people who routinely send in
html, I generally prefer to view those html messages as plaintext,
because that way I get to have *my* choice of the font and size to read
instead of the sender's choice. Sometimes I flip into html view to see
if that view has something 'worth seeing', but generally it doesn't.
--
Mike Easter
Bob Henson
admittedly) I couldn't get Thunderbird to behave in the same manner as
Outlook 2007. I can't remember exactly when I hit problems - but it was
connected to the automatic forwarding of certain messages via a filter,
where the images were not forwarded in-line, but the whole message was
forwarded as an attachment.
--
Bob
Tetbury, Gloucestershire, UK
Bob Henson
On 29/09/2012 6:07 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> As a mail recipient who receives mail from people who routinely send in
> html, I generally prefer to view those html messages as plaintext,
> because that way I get to have *my* choice of the font and size to read
> instead of the sender's choice. Sometimes I flip into html view to see
> if that view has something 'worth seeing', but generally it doesn't.
young people would know what a plain text message was - HTML and pretty
pictures are completely standard now.
--
Bob
Tetbury, Gloucestershire, UK
Twain
Mike Easter
> Mike Easter wrote:
>
>> As a mail recipient who receives mail from people who routinely send in
>> html, I generally prefer to view those html messages as plaintext,
> and pretty pictures are completely standard now.
people I receive html mail from are over 70.
'All of a sudden' all of the young people aren't sending email at all;
they are texting or else sending pix just shot with their 'phones.
... drifting OT again
--
Mike Easter