Hi everyone,
I am seeking advice on how to post detailed images online so they look as good as they do when viewed on monitor at home.
An example is the image posted here. The original is a 3 shot HDR, size 12 Mp. Resizing it to 750 px on long edge I have to compress down to 45% to get it under the 150Kb guide for forums.
What you see here is no where as detailed or rich as the original.
I know that I can set up a Nikonians gallery (which I will) and
sizes there are 1280 px and 250 Kb size, so that will allow better images, but is there a better way?

My post processing (after I am happy with image).
Resize for web (typically 640 or 750 px)
Change colour profile to sRGB
Apply unsharp mask filter
Save for web & devices (CS3) and set highest quality to get under the 150Kb size

Any advice will be gratefully accepted

PS a big thanks to Don Menges for his Photomatix processing workflow. I used that as a starting point and have made only a few modifications to suit me.

cheers
Bruce

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

For web display there is really no way around it. You are subject to the posting requirements of the site. Now, on your own site you can post full res images if you wanted to but then you are risking having your images stolen or people leaving your site out of the frustration created by having to endure long download times.

As far as I am aware there is no work around to the inevitable degradation of the image due to high compression rates.

Ernesto Santos

esartprints.com Ernesto Santos Photography
Now offering fine art print services and ICC printer profiling.
Great service - at a great price!

I wonder if the powers that be have considered letting users post Zoomified images.

Cliff
Manchester, NH, USA

Some images will compress significantly more than others without a corresponding loss in detail. Photos with leaves and branches are the hardest to compress and retain quality. I guess I could and crumbling temples, also. I like the vines on the left as they wrap around the old structure and would like to see more of that kind of detail. Thanks for sharing something I will never get to see, most likely.

Dean
Phoenix, Arizona USA
Nikonians Team Member
Website: The Splendid Silence of Light

Recent Trips: Grand Canyon 2012 Glen Canyon 2012 West Clear Creek

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Thanks everyone for your comments
I will post some images up on the galleries and hopefully they will be in sufficient detail to do the subject justice.

Dean, there are a number of temples at Angkor Archeological Park where the jungle has overgrown the buildings. Ta Phrom is the most famous, think the movie Lara Croft - Tomb Raider, it was partially shot there.
This particular image is taken at Beng MeaLea, which so far is unrestored.

cheers
Bruce

Hey Bruce.... if you have Photoshop, here's what I do and seem to maintain quite a bit of detail. With the original image showing, I click on Image, then Image size. Change the Resolution to 100 (some use 72, but some of the newer screens seem to recognize 100) and then change the dimension of the longest side to 750.

Now choose File, Save for Web and Devices. You'll see the file size in the lower left corner of the screen. Locate the Save dialogue box in the upper right corner and click on the Optimize Menu (the very small triangle to the right of the preset section). When it opens, click on Optimize to File size. Now change the Desired file size to 150k and then click OK. When you're back to the other screen, click on Save (this converts to sRGB if you still have the default settings) and direct the file to a location you can find when back in Nikonians.

Hope that helps.

Don Menges
Menges Technology Integration

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Thanks for advice Don,
I tried that and it did improve the image, particularly the color, but still not to the quality I would like.
I then saved the image at various px sizes, 750, 1000, 1280 and there was a marked improvement with the 1280 version, but not much difference between 750 & 1000.
Consequently I've posted the 1280 image on my gallery (only one so far)

Here's the link



cheers
Bruce