Menu
What's new
Find's Treasure Forums

Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!

You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.

Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.

Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.

Click here to register!

Need Support Help?

Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you

Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.

What's the Secret

A

Anonymous

Guest
I see some photo's on the Internet that have excellent image quality. I have a Nikon 990 and my photo's look great on my computer and on paper but not nearly as nice on the Internet. Is it resolution, compression, image size, lighting or WHAT? If I wanted to post a picture (normal snap shot size) what settings should I use to take the photo and what settings should I use to post it on the net? Please use numbers if possible.
Thanks.
 
What resolution are you taking the picture in. what photoprogram are you using?
Let us see an example or email me one
 
I usually shoot in 2048 x 1536 pixels and use "fine" position which compresses the file down by 1/4. At home I use Photoshop 7.0. On the road (like now, I am in Fl. for the winter) I am using Picture It! The reason being I just recently bought this laptop and do not have my PS 7 CD with me.
I am sending you a copy of this photo at 1.2 MB via e-mail. I thought hard and long about that but figured you might not be able to do anything with a smaller file.
After viewing it in "preview" it is better than most of my web pictures.
 
I like it......
Maybe tone the contrast a little that's all....
RM
 
it is 55 k and the one I sent you was the same size and I think 11k or so. Post that one too and see the comparison. I doubt you will see any.
I like the picture <img src="/metal/html/grin.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt=":grin">
 
OK, here is your 11K version. I can see a difference on the edges in particular. What is the "ideal" file size in KB? I know larger files take longer to load, is there a trade off point?
Is it always better to use the highest resolution / lowest compression even if you know you will only use it on the web or should you shoot it in 640 x 480 or thereabouts?
 
as high a res as I can. I can alway s cut it down in processing but I have all the information to work with.
Every time you make an adjustmemt in JPG and save it a little information is lost.
there may be a little loss in compression but for most pictures it is not very noticable.
I have cable so the size doesn't bother me but when I had dialup, I just would not load the big ones at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top