Opinions please!

Hello again everyone

Sorry for the second post so soon after the previous one, but I just want to ask your opinions on two things before I forget again.

1)  Do legs bleed more than boobs and fingers❓

and

2)  Are jpegs better to use online than gifs❓

Lemme explain:

1)  I'm a spot/scab pickerer - always have been, prolly always will be.  I've noticed that the blood that is produced on my legs is more profuse and takes significantly longer to stop than the blood that is produced on my boobs, fingers and hands.  I can easily stop a finger/hand/boob bleed within less than a minute by wiping the blood away a few times after going a bit deep with my picking/having my blood taken/even having the canula taken out when I leave hospital.  

 

My legs, OTOH, the blood is running down my leg after a few seconds and I have to put significant pressure on the wound for at least a couple of minutes, as well as a plaster for at least 24 hours before the blood stops.

Is that the same for you and everyone else or is my body just weird please❓

 

and now for the second explanation:

2)  For the 20-odd years I've been creating graphics to use online, I've always thought that .jpgs lost quality the more they were viewed, but three people (Steve who's a web developer, and two online courses) have said that it's the other way around and that .jpgs don't lose quality at all, but .gifs do... who's right please❓  

 

I know from personal experience that in the early days of my web/graphic creation back in 1999, .jpgs definitely did lose quality, but that's over two decades ago now, so have things changed and I need to readjust my knowledge because .jpg's don't lose quality the more they're viewed now and because the file size is smaller, it's quicker for them to load on websites too, or have things significantly changed now and .jpg's don't lose quality any more please❓

 

Back to learning about using Facebook for traffic driving to a website now, while I have my lunch (instant zoop and buttered bread)❗