>>>The images will take up the same amount of space whether they are in a table or stored as independant images. Perhaps a bit of overhead for the table, but at least you avoid the directory mess....
>>
>>I wished. It is just that I did that in Access, storing images IN the tables and this is what I got -> 540 megs for only 52 images! And the VFP people saying the SAME THING, so do you know about this or have you even done that? How are they saved as in the table? Please expound.
>>
>>Chuck
>
>The slack of a memo field is up to 64 bytes per record; the slack of a file in a directory rounds up to the next cluster size. The overhead of keeping track is 4 bytes per memo field in the .dbf and some 6 bytes in the .fpt field (per memo field&record); the overhead of keeping them in a disk file is the full or relative pathname you have to store somewhere in the .dbf, plus the name space for the directory structure.

And how do you recommend recovering the image files WHEN the memo/general file gets corrupted? It is much better to store the image (once) as it is in a subdirectory with the relative path stored in the table.(IMNSHO)< G >