Stoker appears to have answered my closing question - he is saving TGA's in PS that don't work in-game, yet produce workable DDS's when converted.
My other reason for using TGA's rather than DDS on my mods is that it leaves them in a more ready state for others to develop their own skins. All this hassle we each go through, to arrive at a reliable way of creating DDS files, I don't think the average modder should have to go through that. If I provide a DDS, then they have to at least find a way to read that file. A TGA, on the other hand, just requires that they have an image editor, which if they are embarking on a skinning project they most certainly already have. And I always envisioned others, like NedF and Holger, etc., developing alternative skins for stuff that I produce. Yes, the TGA is bigger, but I figure that anyone downloading and installing a mod is doing so willingly and they can make their informed choice when they go to download. Mapmakers have the same dilemma - a 1024x1024 map is a huge file to download; they might have chosen to make something 256x256 instead, with the accompanying loss of geographic resolution. If the player can't afford the bandwidth to download the huge maps, then they can just choose to play with smaller ones. I actually prefer a bigger map, because I happen to have a fast computer and a decent net connection, and I don't want to skimp on geographic detail. So, yes, the TGA's present a cost in the form of filesize, but a benefit in terms of non-proprietary format.
I wonder, too, whether a PK4 with DDS files is really that much smaller than one with TGA's instead. I would think that a DDS could not compress as much as a TGA (since the TGA is in uncompressed format), and thus the penalty for the final mod isn't all that great. I haven't tested this.
=Winchester, Paston & Portsmouth=
====== We Provide Pride! ======