A week or so ago I said "There is a bit of a halo under the table on the web image but I put that down to the web conversion by BreezeBrowser and not the fault of PWP"

To which Terry replied :-
Why use Breezbrowser to downsize for web? QU with  DFS (no sharpening halos)  does a much better job.
I find QU is a "one stop shop" for most image tasks.

I tried it today and felt the images were a bit soft. I use BreezeBrowser to build my web pages. For the large image I tell BB to go for 900x900 pixels as this fits most of the screens I see and it adds USM of 1.0 and 1.5. That will be where the halos come from.

I tried Terry's idea. I used the Create Web Size copies in QU and created 900x900 images. I then made a web folder in QU with it set at 900x900 but with no USM. Those are the images I felt were a bit soft.

Am I supposed to add more DFS in QU before I Create Web Size images?

If so how can I preserve the filters I created for the folder as a whole with what I feel are the right DFS settings (varying from one image to another sometimes)?

If you say I should, maybe, use 10 and 400 for my DFS on the Web size images I can see how I should apply it to the whole of the folder. But how do I get back to my earlier DFS settings?

Tony

Thanks Fred.

Snag is I find them too soft.

This is converting to an 85% jpg and letting BB downsize to 900x900 and use USM of 1 and 1.5

http://www.tonygamble.org/normalbb/index.htm

Here I altered that antialias slider to LOW. I let QU downsize to 900x900. I then used BB with USM of 0 and 0

http://www.tonygamble.org/downsizedtoBB/index.htm

My USM figures are Radius and Amount of course.

My DFS is 5 and 100. Should it be a lot more?

Any more thoughts?

Tony

Sorry Tony,
I have no idea what Breeze Browser is doing here.

Please send me the image is full size before downsizing.
Qimage will outperform BB making downsized copies. That's why Mike added the Anti Aliasing to satisfy both ends; the very very sharp, and the folks who like clean images without artifacts.
If I had the image, I could easily see what you are trying to do.


What is this?  Qimage downsized to 900 x 900 and then you used Breeze Browser to do what?

You better wait for Terry. I think he may understand your modus operandus better than I.

Fred

Hi Tony,
That looks a little over-sharpened to me as does the one "with it at 4 and 300 I get this with BB using no USM". But that is a matter of taste.
I reckon BB is re-processing the image to make the HTML version regardless of whether the image is the required pixel size in the first place. I think it's re-saving the jpeg too, which will degrade an image.
Is there any way you can upload the QU 900x900 version direct to you web site gallery and avoid BB altogther? In other words, create an empty template on the web site and then upload the images?
Terry

Hi Tony,
I use PBase, quite cheap and simple I am on the jAlbum email list and look at their offering from time to time. So much of it is fussy and slow and tricksy.
I usually upload 800 pixel images which is "Original" on my galleries. The other sizes, medium etc., are downsized by PBase; at one time "medium" was 800 pixels but they seem to have changed that to 400 pixels.
I can well understand that 
Terry

Tony,
Help me out here!
I am looking at the posted images. On my screen, they are about 9.5 inches x 7.0. How is that 900 x 900?

900 x 900 I can make, but there will be cropping.

Let me know.

Fred

And this is setting my BB to 9999 x 9999.

I cannot see any real difference.

http://www.tonygamble.org/downsize%20html3/index.htm

When I get a chance I'll try Terry's web creator.

Tony

PS. Thanks for those jpgs, Fred. I'll look at them in a moment. I just wanted to explain this 900x900 thingie and the fact that it coverts the whole frame without a crop in QU

No Fred,

I don't want a 900 by 900 image.

I want 900 to be my maximum side as it suits the browser better.

And that seems to be what I am getting.

Tony