Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 30, 2006, 5:48 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 168
Default

Given the file size limit to attachments, what are the suggested pixel size (dimensions) and pixel/inch settings or guidelinesto get reasonable quality and physical size appropriate to direct posting to the list? Thanks.

Cheers, Mike
mgedit is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 30, 2006, 9:25 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
bper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington State
Posts: 454
Default

Hi Mike - This is only a suggestion and many people do it differently. When I post a picture on the web, I down size it to 640 x 480. Most computer monitors now are 1.333 aspect ratio, instead of the 1.5 that Pentax is. I also make it this size, because many people use different settings on there monitor and if it is much bigger, say 1024 x 780, you have to scroll the screen to the right tosee the whole picture. Once a picture is posted that is large all thefollowing posts, even the text ones, make you scroll to read them. A lot of forums are that way and it is a flaw in my opinion.

Having said all this, I tend to crop quite a bit to get what I want in my pictures and for putting on the web, the 1.333 aspect ratio works better. I know the new wider monitors are out now, but not everyone has one yet. Technology, it's always changing. One final word, the Dpreview forum method of displaying the images aslarge thumbnailsseems to work much better then viewing them directly here. This gets around the flaw of having to right scroll every post once a large picture has been posted - Bruce
bper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30, 2006, 9:51 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Catbells's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 874
Default

An image widthequal to or less than 700 pixels is about right but more importantly, is how you compress the size down to 250kB.

I use DCE AutoEnhancewith Lanczos 3 which is good at retaining detail.

Smart Resize in Paintshop Pro is also supposed to be good.

In Adobe Photoshop, try Bicubic Shaper when you resize but tests that I've done places this behind DCE in web size image quality.
Catbells is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30, 2006, 1:11 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,093
Default

I am often guilty of the most barbaric of all resizing, the Windows XP resizing utility downloaded from Microsoft. Simply right click on the image, choose "medium" (about 800X600) and get an instant image of about 150-200MB. (Small gets you a 640X480 of only about 100MB). Yes it is quick and dirty, but most of the time you are only trying to show what you have captured, a little compression won't ruin the composition, and if the resizing doesn't work you can always open you image editor and try something else.

Ira
Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30, 2006, 1:31 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

I usually go with 700 pixels(or smaller) for width - I figure that shouldn't cause too much width problems. If I haven't cropped much it means that the picture looks tiny on my monitor, sometimes a real disadvantage if I'm trying to show off detail and I framed closely. I use CS2 and will usually use one of the medium jpg compression settings. Most of the time this works quite well, but I've had bad luck with it sometimes washing out oranges in sunsets, making what should be spectacular color very boring. I haven't figured out what I'm doing wrong in CS2 to cause it to do that.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30, 2006, 5:51 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Wingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hebron, Kentucky (northern Kentucky/Greater Cincinnati):KCVG
Posts: 4,322
Default

I'm with Ira. Ever since he introdcued me to Windows Power Tools, resizing pictures is a snap for both web postings as well as e-mailing to family and friends! It is a simple and effective (not to mention, fail-safe) method.

Jay
Wingman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30, 2006, 8:02 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 168
Default

Thanks to all for the suggestions ... I downloaded power tools ages ago for some other purpose and did not know there was a resizing utility included. Sounds like the most straightforward approach. Not sure what DCE AutoEnhancewith Lanczos 3 is, but I'll doa google search and track that down too to give it a try.

Cheers, Mike


mgedit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31, 2006, 12:31 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Catbells's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 874
Default

mgedit wrote:
Quote:
Not sure what DCE AutoEnhancewith Lanczos 3 is, but I'll doa google search and track that down too to give it a try.
DCE AutoEnhance is a stand-alone batch processor available from http://www.mediachance.com/dce/index.html

Lanczos 3 refers to thealgorithm used in reducing the file size &, IMHO, produces better images than when using Bicubic etc.

I don't use DCE Autoenhance to batch process images in which it allegedly reads the Exif data & makes individual adjustments - I prefer to do this manually in Photoshop.
Catbells 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 4:55 AM.