Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 21, 2005, 7:41 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
ggw2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 136
Default

Was playing with a full resolution pic today from my FZ20and it took me 4 times to get the size down to less than 240K:?. Anyone know of an easy way to do it in "Elements" or another program (free would be nice). Thanks, Gerry
ggw2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 21, 2005, 7:51 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
boyzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,544
Default

ggw2000 wrote:
Quote:
Was playing with a full resolution pic today from my FZ20 and it took me 4 times to get the size down to less than 240K:?. Anyone know of an easy way to do it in "Elements" or another program (free would be nice). Thanks, Gerry
Resizing is not enough at times you need to use a higher Jpeg
compression.
look in save as options
boyzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2005, 8:54 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 287
Default

From my short time here, and my lack of server space. I've found that 740x555 is an ok size to go down to and allows you to use less jpg compression to meet the upload requirement.

I just used the bundled software.

Hope this helps a little bit.
smilez03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2005, 9:33 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
fmoore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,116
Default

In Elements, open a pic. Go to Image/Image Size. Make sure the Resample Image box is checked and change the Pixel Dimensions width to 640 (or 500 or 800 -640's good) and hit OK. Then go to File and Save As. Dont just hit save. You want to always hold onto the original. Choose a save level of 10 and givethe filea new name and hit save. Make sure you know where you're saving it.

Irfanviewis an excellent free downloadable program that resizes easily among other things. I use Polyview. The unregistered version does everything but print. $30 to register for a lifetime.
fmoore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2005, 10:31 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
greenboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 101
Default

It's real easy to get to 250K in a jpeg at such a small size as 640x480 or thereabouts. Almost can't miss - some images even are tough to get UP to that filesize in jpeg. I really didn't dig the Elemets way of working much, so now I use Ulead PhotoImpact10 most of the time (though I am looking more and more at Picture Window Pro 3.5 for some stuff).

Anyway, there you can bicubic resize to whatever dimensions you desire, and if you want to not touch the original large sized file or name they have a WEB menu that has an image optimizer that allows you to test PNG GIF and JPG of various compressions, picking what type of subsampling and optimising and filtering to use, etc, and as you try selections you can actually see at any desired maginication what impact that has on the pixels if it were to be saved and reloaded.

At the same time, at the top it gives you what the filesize in bytes would be, and what the average download would be over 56K dialup - which I find useful on some sites, knowing that there are a lot of dialup users there or tight bandwidth throttling (or not).

It's pretty nice having two separate SAVE/SAVE AS requesters with different filenames and directories going at the same time. Really easy to use too.
greenboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2005, 4:03 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
TimvdVelde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 395
Default

photoshop / elements -> save for web - 60%

More than enough quality. 720 - 540 px
TimvdVelde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2005, 4:13 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
greenboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 101
Default

Hey Tim,

Are there any limits here on inline remote-hosted picture dimensions? I used to save a lot in 1440 x 960, 1344 x 1008, 1280 x 960 etc and still keep my filesizes down usually.
greenboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2005, 4:22 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
TimvdVelde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 395
Default

The only limit is viewability.

1024x768 is the most common monitor resolution.. so If you post a picture that size.. some people will not be able to view them. On the forum. I always hold to a maximum of 800 pixel width. Otherwise users with 1024 resolution, can't read post without scrolling

For online galleries with thumbnails size doesn't matter, I always upload pictures 1280 x 960

I think this is what you mean ?
TimvdVelde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2005, 4:38 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
greenboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 101
Default

What - everybody isn't using a modern browser like Firebird with auto-scaling? - 1600 x 1200 here (sometimes I wish I had biiger and more til I realize I need bigger and more everywhere else too) means I want the pictures at least big enough to be able to see them myself ; } ..Last time I did a web survey I was seeing 1280 x 1024 or 960 - and that was a couple years ago at least.

Thanks, Tim!
greenboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2005, 5:26 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
TimvdVelde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 395
Default

I always work @ 1280 x 1024.

But I can't get pictures of 1600x1200 under 200 kb (at acceptable filesize).
And some people still have dial-up (!!! yes it still exists!)

On my dutchphoto forum. I always post a thumbnail with fullsize link. Because all dutch people have cable 2000kbit >

TimvdVelde 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 4:08 PM.