[spider-mario]

> lossless jpeg recompression kind of fits in the middle somewhere... you care enough about size to go through the trouble to recompress, but you don't care so much that you will use high-quality sources and you care about quality enough that you don't want to lose quality when recompressing, but again not so much that you will use high-quality sources.

You’re assuming that the high-quality original is still available. If the JPEG is all you have, then losslessly recompressing it is the smallest file of the highest quality you can get.

[jmull]

If you don't keep track of the high-quality originals, how much do you really care about having the highest quality?

That's what I mean by "tweener" solution. You care a little about quality because you don't want to lose any more that you already have lost in your jpg, but not so much that you're keeping track of the high-quality originals. It's not nothing, but it's also not a big deal.