Different ways to post photos?

I've noticed that posts with pictures can look different.
One way is the picture is in a box that says "attachment" or "attached file" (crap I already forgot what it says, and I was just looking at one-LOL) in the second type of post, the picture doesn't have the box or the "attached file" more like the picture is actually part of the post, rather than an attachment.
Also, of the two different types of picture posts, one type seems to load a little faster on my Dial-up.

Just wondered if anybody knew what the difference was, or how the ones that don't seem to be attachments were posted.

John,

The basic way is to "attach" the image to your post having it stored on fauna's web server. Those are size limited and appear at the end of the post.

To place an image within the post, it needs to reside on an external server and then be linked to between a pair of image tags ([IMG]full_path_to_web_address_of_photo_here[/IMG]) like the following which is in my photobucket.com account:




At the end of the post is one that I "attached" to the post. BTW, that is not my snake. I photographed it at Ben Siegel's table at the most recent Raleigh, NC show with his permission.

Okay. Thanks Jim. I've been doing the attached method. Your post also helped me remember which one loads faster, as I'm still waiting for the first photo , which makes sense that the attached ones would load faster, as they reside on this server.

Actually the speed is not necessarily related to where they are stored as the links take you to the respective server and the other may be faster than fauna's. It more likely is a size issue. The in-line image is 332K vs 46K for the attached image.