Mike Chaney's Tech Corner
September 29, 2020, 02:35:07 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Feb 2013: Qimage Ultimate Challenges... have fun and explore features!
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Download and develop photos from your flash cards with one click!
Get a trial of
FlashPipe today and stop fumbling with explorer windows to transfer photos and videos
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: Web/email size copies  (Read 14208 times)
Owen Glendower
Full Member
***
Posts: 185


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: September 04, 2012, 04:44:10 PM »

Quote
You have to understand that knackered is not a word we hear on this side of the pond.

Ah, yes...British usage and American usage...

In the mid-1960s, I spent two summers working for a general contractor in my home town.  He was a WWII vet who saw combat in Belgium, but spent much of his service time in England.  Early on, he was allowed a period of R & R and went to a London hotel.

After he checked in, the attractive young lady behind the desk handed him his key and asked, "And what time would you like to be knocked up in the morning?"

He had previously received advice that this hotel was a good place to stay, and momentarily took the young lady's comment as confirmation of that advice.

He ultimately returned to the states with a British bride, so evidently the language barrier was not insurmountable.
Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3196



View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: September 04, 2012, 04:46:32 PM »

Jeff,
Quote
Checked web size against sns hdr .tiff original.  Quite a difference.
I did some macro shots about an hour ago and sent a 1024 pixel image to Fred.
See attached below, a screen shot from QU comparator: - 1024 px jpeg on the left, the raw image on the right. The 1024 jpeg is zoomed in 1 click and the raw was zoomed out to get the on-screen size as close as possible.
Except for the resolution differences, and  a little colour error due the monitor profile in the screen capture, there's no real difference.
Terry

PS. corrected, the 1024 px was not zoomed in with the comparator.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2012, 04:52:34 PM by Terry-M » Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3196



View Profile WWW
« Reply #17 on: September 04, 2012, 04:58:20 PM »

Quote
and  a little colour error due the monitor profile in the screen capture, there's no real difference
and here is the same jpeg screen image corrected for monitor profile and re-saved at 80%.
Spot the difference other than colour?
Terry
Logged
Fred A
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 5326



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #18 on: September 04, 2012, 05:09:39 PM »

Judging by your posts and the screen snaps, it seems like you are telling Jeff to stop "Bugging" you.    :-)
 Grin Cheesy Wink Smiley
Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3196



View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: September 04, 2012, 09:53:39 PM »

Quote
Judging by your posts and the screen snaps, it seems like you are telling Jeff to stop "Bugging" you
No, I just want to understand what the problem is; I wonder if something is going on that we are not aware of which is causing Jeff's downs-sized images to be degraded.
Terry
Logged
Jeff
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 733



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #20 on: September 05, 2012, 07:25:42 AM »

Quote
I am about knackered.

Jeff,
You have to understand that knackered is not a word we hear on this side of the pond.
Could you, perhaps, put "Knackered" in some sort of level for us.?

Where would it fit; between what numbers?

1) Getting tired

2) Need a break

3) Getting bushed

4) Flagged out

5) Fagged out

6) Exhausted

7) Pooped

Cool Dog tired

9) Need a nap

10) Last time I do one of these!

11) I don't care what it costs. Call the repairman!


14568

It would make a good password Smiley

Knackered is a saying from the time of working horses.

When they were old and passed it they were sent to the Knackers Yard.  A place where knackered horses were dispatched.

I will post my before and after when I 'next fire up QU' but the tiff will be many megs.  Will see about posting on Zenfolio.

Out for the rest of day on orders of SWMBO

Jeff
Logged

Grumpy
Fred A
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 5326



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #21 on: September 05, 2012, 11:06:04 AM »

Quote
I will post my before and after when I 'next fire up QU' but the tiff will be many megs.  Will see about posting on Zenfolio.

Out for the rest of day on orders of SWMBO

Jeff,
Perhaps you can tell SWMBO (She who must be obeyed) that you are "knackered" and not have to go?

Seriously, getting back to the "degrading" question.
I have some settings to offer you.
I just did some experiments and posting is difficult because in order to fit the minuscule allowance of file size, I have to scrunch the screen snap.

The biggest difference in what seems to be quality degradation but is actually less sharpening, is the setting you choose in the Anti-Aliasing setting.
If you set that to low.... you are "golden"
Now, you can do 90% or 50% quality and can barely see the difference.

Terry touched on this earlier when he mentioned roof lines and certain line patterns that require a higher setting of Anti aliasing.
Set yours to LOW.

Snap 081 shows the setting I was talking about.
Snap 077 shows a Quality setting of 25%  (Pretty darn low and should compromise the quality
Snap 082 shows a Quality setting of 90%, and finally
Snap 078 is the Original Raw.

This shot is a beautiful image shot by Terry, so sharp and perfect that I want to smell the print.

What I am showing you is there is no degrading to be seen at all when downsizing using 90%, and even 25% (which is really an emergency extreme) is tolerable.

If you get poor results at your end, then you need to send me or/and Terry your original.
You have done it before... using WETRANSFER or YOUSENDIT, both free!

Fred
Logged
Jeff
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 733



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #22 on: September 07, 2012, 07:03:33 AM »

Thanks to you all for comments.

I have not previously messed about with the Anti aliasing settings, always been satisfied with default, but had a quick look yesterday morning and did notice differences.

Any way have now well and truly run out of time, and will have to investigate further in a week or so.  All next week I am as they say 'tied up'

Jeff 

Logged

Grumpy
Fred A
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 5326



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #23 on: September 07, 2012, 09:12:52 AM »

Quote
All next week I am as they say 'tied up'

Lucky man!!
Does your wife have the fuzzy handcuffs?

Logged
Fred A
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 5326



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #24 on: September 10, 2012, 10:02:28 PM »

Here's an odd turn of events.
I shot this a few days ago, and was sending it to some friends when I couldn't believe my eyes!
Horrors!!

I had left the compression/quality setting on 25 from when I was trying to show the flowers in a previous post.

So, I had to redo it, but it does afford me a striking example to show how the image degrades.

Look at the blue sky....
One is 25 Quality and the other is 90

Easier to see than the flowers.

Fred
Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3196



View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: September 11, 2012, 10:43:09 AM »

Jeff and others,
Quote
I have not previously messed about with the Anti aliasing settings, always been satisfied with default, but had a quick look yesterday morning and did notice differences.
I took a photograph at the weekend that seemed ideal to show the differences with the Anti Alias settings. I've put them on Pbase and linked to this post below.
I chose this image particularly because of the roof tiles and the moire pattern that can occur. The original image is a 5202 x 3465 pixel CR2 image downsized to 900 pixels on the long side.
Anti Alias OFF                                                                                                                                                      Anti Alias HIGH


Anti Alias LOW                                                                                                                                                      Anti Alias MED


I normally use the Low setting but in this case, if the moire patterns bother you, the Medium setting is better.
Terry
PS. Jeff, you may know this place as it's in your county, Belton House near Grantham.  Wink
« Last Edit: September 11, 2012, 01:38:36 PM by Terry-M » Logged
Jeff
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 733



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #26 on: September 24, 2012, 10:28:26 AM »

Jeff and others,
Quote
I have not previously messed about with the Anti aliasing settings, always been satisfied with default, but had a quick look yesterday morning and did notice differences.
I took a photograph at the weekend that seemed ideal to show the differences with the Anti Alias settings. I've put them on Pbase and linked to this post below.
I chose this image particularly because of the roof tiles and the moire pattern that can occur. The original image is a 5202 x 3465 pixel CR2 image downsized to 900 pixels on the long side.

I normally use the Low setting but in this case, if the moire patterns bother you, the Medium setting is better.
Terry
PS. Jeff, you may know this place as it's in your county, Belton House near Grantham.  Wink

Thanks for the excellent examples.  Just getting back to the subject (been away to the Mosel area of Germany, a photographic disaster Smiley)

I have seen moire patterns mainly on thumbnails and camera screen, they seem to be taken care of in the raw development.

I will be looking through my image stock to try to find some examples to mess about with.

I am told we have never been to Belton House, Burghley House some years ago but I cannot remember much about it.

Thanks again for your efforts

Jeff
Logged

Grumpy
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3196



View Profile WWW
« Reply #27 on: September 24, 2012, 01:04:55 PM »

H Jeff,
welcome home.
Quote
I have seen moire patterns mainly on thumbnails and camera screen, they seem to be taken care of in the raw development.
Thumbnails and screens require a big pixel size reduction and it's unlikely the downsizing is very sophisticated so it's not surprising moire patterns appear. As soon as you look at the full size image, raw or jpeg, they'll not usually be visible.
Terry
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!