Ah, yes...British usage and American usage...

In the mid-1960s, I spent two summers working for a general contractor in my home town.  He was a WWII vet who saw combat in Belgium, but spent much of his service time in England.  Early on, he was allowed a period of R & R and went to a London hotel.

After he checked in, the attractive young lady behind the desk handed him his key and asked, "And what time would you like to be knocked up in the morning?"

He had previously received advice that this hotel was a good place to stay, and momentarily took the young lady's comment as confirmation of that advice.

He ultimately returned to the states with a British bride, so evidently the language barrier was not insurmountable.

and here is the same jpeg screen image corrected for monitor profile and re-saved at 80%.
Spot the difference other than colour?
Terry

No, I just want to understand what the problem is; I wonder if something is going on that we are not aware of which is causing Jeff's downs-sized images to be degraded.
Terry

Jeff,
Perhaps you can tell SWMBO (She who must be obeyed) that you are "knackered" and not have to go?

Seriously, getting back to the "degrading" question.
I have some settings to offer you.
I just did some experiments and posting is difficult because in order to fit the minuscule allowance of file size, I have to scrunch the screen snap.

The biggest difference in what seems to be quality degradation but is actually less sharpening, is the setting you choose in the Anti-Aliasing setting.
If you set that to low.... you are "golden"
Now, you can do 90% or 50% quality and can barely see the difference.

Terry touched on this earlier when he mentioned roof lines and certain line patterns that require a higher setting of Anti aliasing.
Set yours to LOW.

Snap 081 shows the setting I was talking about.
Snap 077 shows a Quality setting of 25%  (Pretty darn low and should compromise the quality
Snap 082 shows a Quality setting of 90%, and finally
Snap 078 is the Original Raw.

This shot is a beautiful image shot by Terry, so sharp and perfect that I want to smell the print.

What I am showing you is there is no degrading to be seen at all when downsizing using 90%, and even 25% (which is really an emergency extreme) is tolerable.

If you get poor results at your end, then you need to send me or/and Terry your original.
You have done it before... using WETRANSFER or YOUSENDIT, both free!

Fred

Lucky man!!
Does your wife have the fuzzy handcuffs?

Jeff and others,
I took a photograph at the weekend that seemed ideal to show the differences with the Anti Alias settings. I've put them on Pbase and linked to this post below.
I chose this image particularly because of the roof tiles and the moire pattern that can occur. The original image is a 5202 x 3465 pixel CR2 image downsized to 900 pixels on the long side.
Anti Alias OFF                                                                                                                                                      Anti Alias HIGH


Anti Alias LOW                                                                                                                                                      Anti Alias MED


I normally use the Low setting but in this case, if the moire patterns bother you, the Medium setting is better.
Terry
PS. Jeff, you may know this place as it's in your county, Belton House near Grantham.  

H Jeff,
welcome home.
Thumbnails and screens require a big pixel size reduction and it's unlikely the downsizing is very sophisticated so it's not surprising moire patterns appear. As soon as you look at the full size image, raw or jpeg, they'll not usually be visible.
Terry