Posting Pix on the web
|
-
#1. "RE: Posting Pix on the web" | In response to Reply # 0
They look ok to me. Could it be your browser or internet ISP? I know back in the days when I used AOL for surfing the web, I had to reset my graphics settings or else the photos looked bad.
Now, someday I hope you explain to me (and others too) how you did the rollover effect. Where you move the mouse over a thumbnail print and it shows large in the center.
I have been working on my website for many moons now, and you just gave me another idea, but I have no idea how to do something like that. I'm using PS 7 if that helps.
-
#2. "RE: Posting Pix on the web" | In response to Reply # 1
Thanks Doug, but even from my office the pictures look bad.
As for the code, it is javascript look at the source file. I also took the best of things that I saw on other sites and put it all in one.
Blessed Are The Flexible, For They Shall Not Get Bent Out of Shape
-
-
-
#3. "RE: Posting Pix on the web" | In response to Reply # 0
Still loading...
I'll go put dinner under the broiler and see if the page is up when I get back...
Sorry. It never would load for me. Is one of the linked image files really big?
BJ
-
#5. "RE: Posting Pix on the web" | In response to Reply # 3
jrp Charter MemberThu 08-Aug-02 02:03 AMThe very small thumbnails should be smaller in weight.
I cannot tell since you are not allowing for download.
Maybe you are using the same (big) images for them , just constraing it display size at the table, so it takes them forever to load.
In order to prevent much degrading of images, do unsharpening at the very end of your process. If you do before you reduce size you get a lot of noise.
Have a great time! 😉
JRP
Founder & Administrator. Mainly at the north-eastern Mexican desert Gallery, My Portfolio
Please join the Silver, Gold and Platinum members who help this happen; upgrade
You want to do more for Nikonians? Please Donate here, we need your help.
You want to further improve your images? Visit the Post for Critique and Advanced Advice forums.
"RE: Posting Pix on the web"
The images look fine on my screen but they are pretty small (running 1280x1024 resolution). I tried viewing them at a lower screen res(800x600)and they looked fairly grainy.
The problem might be because they are GIFs. An 8bit GIF contains only 256 colors so you will loose alot of colour detail and will see banding in sky and water.
Try saving the files as JPG images instead of GIFs. Gif's are great for logos and thumbnails but, because of the limited color depth, are not great for displaying images.
Here are is a sample of the difference between a JPG and GIF.
The JPG is 10k (70% quality) and the GIF is 57kb (8 bit)
(The conversions were done in Microsoft Photo editor so they aren't nearly as good quality as Photoshop...It's all I have access to at work)
Hope this helps...
Richard
Attachment#1 (gif file)
Attachment#2 (jpg file)
-
#7. "RE: Posting Pix on the web" | In response to Reply # 0
Richard, A picture is worth a thousand words. Thanks for the example.
JRP, you are right I am using the same images for the thumbnails. Should I not do that?
BJ, I'm sorry you couldn't see the pix.
Thanks for all the comments. I'll go back to the drawing board and save the pics as jpegs with unsharpening.
Blessed Are The Flexible, For They Shall Not Get Bent Out of Shape
-
#8. "RE: Posting Pix on the web" | In response to Reply # 7
jrp Charter MemberThu 08-Aug-02 07:51 PM>JRP, you are right I am using the same images for the
>thumbnails. Should I not do that?
Don't. Use smaller jpeg images as thumbnails. It should improve downloading quite a lot.
I just finished another short article using the workflow I described before. You may want to check it out: A shoot-out at 70mm
Good luck and again, congratulations, wonderful images.
Have a great time! 😉
JRP
Founder & Administrator. Mainly at the north-eastern Mexican desert Gallery, My Portfolio
Please join the Silver, Gold and Platinum members who help this happen; upgrade
You want to do more for Nikonians? Please Donate here, we need your help.
You want to further improve your images? Visit the Post for Critique and Advanced Advice forums.
-
#12. "RE: Posting Pix on the web" | In response to Reply # 0
-----
I think you’re bad experience with PS 5.5 and the Save for Web option could be related to your previous use of the GIF format. I “tweak” an image with the Save for Web for upload to Nikonians all the time. Same 5.5 PS BTW.
In my case, I often start with a shot in the 20 to 35 meg range in pure Photoshop. I make my curve adjustments primarily in the RGB color space.
Then, ---when I know I have what I want ---I use the crop tool, set to 600 pixels wide (for horizontals -- 400 wide for verticals), and set the pixels per inch to 100. Now I know the final result will be 72 pixels, but I do this for a reason. The crop has taken me closer to the final, and it is at this point that I do my unsharp masking. JRP's point about sharpening only at the end should ne etched in stone.
Then I go to Save for Web. One reason I like this method is that the “web optimized view” comes up very fast, instead of having to wait for the CPU to number crunch the 30 megs to something infinitely smaller.
I don’t bother with the two up shot showing the original and new side by side-- I just look at the “optimized” version.
The final product choice is JPEG High for starters, via “progressive “, not ICC profile. The Optimized button is checked. This usually has me at around 90 to 150 k.
Then I look to the bottom left and see what kind of numbers I’m dealing with.
Too big?-- I flip from high to medium. touch the image, and watch the new numbers-- if it pops to 50K, I look to the right under the check-marked “Optimized" and see the Quality number-- Change the number up one or two digits-- remember to "touch" your optimized view picture to make it assume the new properties you've assigned as a result of the number change. Nothing will happen if you only change the numbers. --Just watch and see what happens, each time the K-count creeps upward. When I get it close to 67 to 68 k-- I save. That’s what I meant by “tweaking.”
On a few occasions I’ve had the quality right where I wanted it and was still at 78 or 80 k. If I didn’t want to go down anymore-- I’d merely go to image size and change it from a 600 wide to a 550 wide-- Bingo -- I’m in.
An example of the sharpness is attached-- one I did a few days ago responding to one of Lordnikon’s never ending (but fun) challenges.
---Tom
"Shoot everything f/16 at a 100 and let the lab boys worry about it."
Attachment#1 (jpg file)
---Tom
"Shoot everything f/16 at a 100 and let the lab boys worry about it."
"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the camera."
-
#9. "RE: Posting Pix on the web" | In response to Reply # 12
Your 100 ppi intermediate setting makes no sense to me. It doesn't really matter what value you use since the web display will override it anyway. All sharpening should be done after you are done with image resizing. If you downsample the image, sharpen, and downsample again, you'll lose some of the sharpening you added and you add a step of image degradation.
I advise anyone learning how to prep web images to size them in pixel dimensions and forget about the dpi setting. This takes out a confusing aspect of resizing. If you view the image at "actual size", Photoshop will display the image at browser size. Do your sharpening while viewing the image at actual size. If you're zoomed in or out you won't get an accurate read of the sharpening effect.
If you upgrade Photoshop, you'll get Imageready in the bundle which offers all that "save for web" does with more control and options. I recommend using Imageready for web image prep since it displays in sRGB colorspace.
If you work with wide gamut images that have Adobe RGB (1998) or similar colorspace (a good choice for images that you will print), your images will look desaturated by about 20% when saved for the web. I convert my images to sRGB before sizing them for web viewing.
BJ
-
#10. "RE: Posting Pix on the web" | In response to Reply # 9
flashdeadline Registered since 07th Apr 2002Mon 12-Aug-02 12:20 AMI chose the 100 after some experimenting.
We all approach things differently, and in my case, I found that the unsharp mask at 100, which would eventually get the overide was giving me the crisper images.
I also use the 100 dpi because it helps move the Save for Web function with less lag time.
Take the 30 meg file, say Save for Web, and watch the time it takes.
Now, take the 1 meg file--- and do the same.
This is just my way-- and it works for me. Honest guys---I never for once thought it was the best way.
I hope I haven't led anybody astray with that advice.
"Shoot everything f/16 at a 100 and let the lab boys worry about it."
---Tom
"Shoot everything f/16 at a 100 and let the lab boys worry about it."
"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the camera." -
#11. "RE: Posting Pix on the web" | In response to Reply # 9
N80 Basic MemberMon 12-Aug-02 07:25 PMThere is another trick for keeping colors saturated when using the Save for Web feature. When you open it you will see a small arrow over the right upper corner of the preview image. When you click on this you get a dialog box that lists different types of compensation such as Windows, Macintosh or Photoshop compensation. I choose Photoshop compensation because it seems to look best and displays best in browsers. I'm not exactly sure what is done to the image but it works great for me.
George Barron
My Nikonians Gallery is here:
https://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/1091
-
G
I am using PhotoShop 5.5. I am also using an Espon 2450 to scan my slides. The original scan looks good on my screen but is huge. I use the save for web option and I end up with a nice small file size that looks fine on my screen but when I post it, it looks like crap.
Here are the specs on one particular pix
Slide 1a - 6" x 3.833" - 300 pixels/inch - 5.93MB
Slide 1b - 4.167" x 2.667 72 pixels/inch - 8 bit color - 52K
You can see the results on here - http://clicks.wordupcontent.com/Gallery/Outdoor/o_index.htm
Ms. Goodie
Blessed Are The Flexible Because They Shall Not Get Bent Out of Shape