It's hard to be too critical, because overall we know this is the best program available to fight spam, however, always room for improvement.

The image filter needs improvement.  Others use more than just the image itself to determine if the image should be the basis for failing a spam check.  For example, if there is 50 lines of text and then and embedded image so the image is not even likely being seen by the user without scrolling down to it, it's likely the image is a signature and should not fail unless other characteristics of the image make it so obvious. 

I don't believe any type of OCR is wise at all, but I urge Logsat to look into expanding the logic and accuracy of the image filtering in SpamFilter.  We can't run without it now and it is the number one cause of false positives in the program.

-MJR 

Ok, Let me turn this into one simple request:

Please consider the number of lines down the body of the email before the first image is displayed so silly little signature images are not scanned or are weighted based on their being the only image so far down in the message body that you have to scroll to see it, please?