>Tell me please, what particular statements do you object to? >Is it primarily the statements about the JPEG issue, or >others?
I was primarily objecting to the JPEG statements. It was starting to sound like some of the Canon ads a few months back! It seemed to definitely say JPEG is only good for snapshots and worthless for anything else. While I agree with you about many of the issues about JPEG throwing away data, there are many non-snapshot applications where it works perfectly - as is evidenced by how many pros use it for other than snapshots.
I think I would feel better about the article was giving JPEG a fair hearing. Talk about the cases where it works really well (not just snapshots) - this approach is more of a "here's all the facts, draw your own conclusions based on what you need the photo for" might gain more respect from readers.
The reason I suggested posting a copy to NikonDigital is that there are many advanced amatuers and pros using JPEG on a dailing basis. They may be helpful to you in exploring some of these cases where JPEG really is acceptable. David Cardninal over there is also the author of DigitalPro (image mgmt/editor tailored for Nikon digital SLRs) and may be willing to give you some more technical feedback on the data loss due to compression.