Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Landscape Photos

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 2, 2007, 5:34 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
longside1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 693
Default

Hey, many thanks for your comment Mhansen
longside1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2007, 5:41 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
musket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,782
Default

A beautiful scene, I think however that a file size of only 46kb for a picture

of this size 1024x620 would not be able to display the picture to it's

best advantage and 1024x620 is really to big to fit properly on the screen

anyway, so for the PP if I were judging and giving marks I would have to take

away a few points for these shortcomings.
musket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2007, 5:47 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
longside1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 693
Default

Muskett, i still have the original tiff and psp file for this shot and they came in at about 45mb! The tiff is really impressive due to its lossless nature.


I know that some quality would be lost during jpeg compression, i always use the highest quality settings when i convert in PS so i'm not really sure what else i can do. Can you elaborate a little more?

longside1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2007, 5:53 AM   #14
eu
Senior Member
 
eu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: izmir / Turkey
Posts: 165
Default

longside1 wrote:
Quote:
I have never heard of the software. What is it used for?
Bryce is a 3D landscape modelling programme. I haven't intrested with it for a long time though. It seems they've improved the software a lot.
You may check it from here

emre
eu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2007, 5:55 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
longside1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 693
Default

Many thanks EU, to be honest i don't think i have the creativity to work with Bryce! Plus learning Photoshop is taking up most of my time at the moment!!:?
longside1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2007, 6:20 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
musket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,782
Default

longside1 wrote:
Quote:
Muskett, i still have the original tiff and psp file for this shot and they came in at about 45mb! The tiff is really impressive due to its lossless nature.


I know that some quality would be lost during jpeg compression, i always use the highest quality settings when i convert in PS so i'm not really sure what else i can do. Can you elaborate a little more?
Well it would appear then that the compression ratio you got from 45mb to 46k

is (gets the windows calculator out lol) 1000 to 1 if a tiff file needs 45mb

it's hard to see how a jpg needs only 46k to portray the same information

it seems that somehow the conversion and compression is excessive in this

case. I wonder if you had saved it as a BMP file and then converted to jpg,

if the file size would have then been so small and just how the photo would

appear ie any different visually. Jpg is a lossy format and photo dimension viz

file size in kbyte are always worth close inspection in PP. musket
musket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2007, 6:29 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
longside1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 693
Default

Cheers for the heads up Muskett. I think i have worked out how the file size became so small, i omitted part of the process (whoops)

After convertingt to jpeg, the file size was about 2mb, and too large to post on the forum. So i used photo resize (windows power tool) to further reduce the size. The end result is the above photo.

I must admit it really annoys me when i have a good looking photo in PS, only to convert it to a jpeg with the results looking poor. Such is life!
longside1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2007, 8:06 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
John Maddock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,663
Default

That's a real beauty Matt: good composition, and a good job merging the two exposures as well.

John.
John Maddock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2007, 9:19 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
gilbill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 195
Default

Matt, thanks for your exposture info and explaining how you got such a great photo!

Debbie
gilbill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2007, 10:46 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
musket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,782
Default

longside1 wrote:
Quote:
Cheers for the heads up Muskett. I think i have worked out how the file size became so small, i omitted part of the process (whoops)

After convertingt to jpeg, the file size was about 2mb, and too large to post on the forum. So i used photo resize (windows power tool) to further reduce the size. The end result is the above photo.

I must admit it really annoys me when i have a good looking photo in PS, only to convert it to a jpeg with the results looking poor. Such is life!
Ah great all figured out :-)

Ref: file size and photo dimensions check this out

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...702774#p702774

If you use an external site you can up the file size for your photos

and you will see the difference file size makes to photo quality...musket
musket is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:46 PM.