Quixotic Evil

Actually, if your cameraphone takes an anyway half-decent 640x480 picture, it should work fine for a moblog. It's getting the pics to resize a wee bit so they're not too big that's the clincher.

How'd you get it to work so nice though? I'm stuck with Flickr, as my knowledge of magic (ie computers) is limited to what I've picked up in the last year or two from knowing Mr. Sevitz.

Depends what you mean, 'nice'. I modified the plugin I was using so that it put only the address to the image into the blog, rather than constructing mark-up to display it, and after that it's just messing around with the templates.
Note that the sidebar image isn't a real thumbnail, it's the same image told to look narrower. Later on I'll put in a thumbmailing script, but since my phone only makes ~15k images there's no hurry.

If this is actually of interest to anyone, I'll do a proper post about it. I know the non-geeks among you probably just take it for granted that this stuff is possible and that it just works, but I can't get over the elegance of a solution that has so many protocols and bits of software working together to achieve something that can really change the way this sort of thing works.

I don't really consider myself a geek as such, I do, however, have an interest in all things geeky. Using Flickr for moblogging (on MT) is simple(ish) and requires nothing more than getting the mt.cgi-bin address correct on your Flickr Blog page.

I'd love, however, to be able to not use Flickr at all, but I simply haven't the time to learn exactly how to do it myself, as I'm sure it would require me knowing stuff about scripts and templates and a helluva lot more about markup than I do now.

From what I DO know though, it seems to me that telling an image to look narrower than it actually is is far more cleverer than making an ickle image to display (and link to the big 'un).

I suppose it's mildly smarter than having two image files of different size, if that's what you mean, but <img src="url" /> gives you an image in its natural proportions, while <img src="url" style="width:50px" /> tells it to be 50 pixels wide.
The script to resize automatically is a bit of a paradigm shift (since it would be written in a language normally used for text manipulation) and may need some non-standard stuff installed on the server, although once you've got the prerequisites it's surprisingly easy.

If I can make the story sound interesting, I'll give the moblog a post of its own once I'm happy that it works.

You don't need to put a style in the IMG tag to tell it what width to be...

Well you could use the width attribute, but I can never be bothered to work out what's deprecated and what's browser-specific, so I tend to stick to CSS these days.

I must admit that HTML isn't a strong point any more; hacking phpBB boards and Nucleus plugins is far more interesting than writing mark-up.

I'm not sure camera quality is particularly important; from what I've seen of similar blogs, it seems to be more knowing what your camera/phone can do and seeing what you can do with it...

I do like the idea of different bits of technology working together like this (and the geekery which allows them to do it :-)).