pic size

[HeatherM]

Ok. I've looked everywhere. What is the best size to post my pictures?

[CaptainTom]

for this site I use 72 or 96 ppi and the longest side at 800 pixels quality 12.

[srwatters]

Just to comment on Tom's suggestion, the ppi (pixels per inch) numbers are immaterial when you are rendering the image on a digital medium (computer screen, TV, cell phone, etc.). These numbers are important when rendering the image on paper because they will determine the quality of the image. You can also save some bandwidth and upload/download time by using no more than jpg quality 10. Many studies have been done and I personally cannot tell the difference between quality 10 and 12. In fact most studies show that the majority of people can't tell the difference between quality 8 and 12 for most images. The difference in file size between 10 and 12 can sometimes be very large. Just some information for you to consider and I would suggest you do your own test to be confident in the results.

[jfoureyes]

I've just noticed the jpegs can be Max width and height of 900 pixels and the Max file size is still 293.0 KB.

[CaptainTom]

Originally Posted by srwatters

Just to comment on Tom's suggestion, the ppi (pixels per inch) numbers are immaterial when you are rendering the image on a digital medium (computer screen, TV, cell phone, etc.). These numbers are important when rendering the image on paper because they will determine the quality of the image. You can also save some bandwidth and upload/download time by using no more than jpg quality 10. Many studies have been done and I personally cannot tell the difference between quality 10 and 12. In fact most studies show that the majority of people can't tell the difference between quality 8 and 12 for most images. The difference in file size between 10 and 12 can sometimes be very large. Just some information for you to consider and I would suggest you do your own test to be confident in the results.

I did a test and here are the results.
I took a.jpeg image and resized in PS to 5ppi and quality ten, and then to 300ppi and quality 10.
I know they will look 'soft' because I don't convert them for TPF properly, but I concede to Scott's information because I don't see the difference in either one and the file sizes are the same.

I now have a problem. I tried to upload the image after sizing it to 300ppi 800 pixels on the long side and quality 12. It shows file size 491kb file size but when I upload it, it comes to TPF at file size 68.5kb. What's up with that ??

Canon 7d 24-105f4IS cloudy day.
only sharpening added to OOC.

[PeaceFrog]

I generally like 800x533 for the web. It seems to give enough detail to get the feel for the picture but doesn’t create such large files that the photos are tough to view or slow to download.

Greg

[sandboa]

As for the image size, I didn't notice that TPF had increased the max file dimensions to 900 pixels. Didn't it used to be 750?

I generally aim for 800 pixels on long dimension and a file size around 200kb. I up the quality setting based on what those limits will allow.

Rarely can I tell much difference between a quality of 7 vs 12, other than file size of course.

Can you tell any difference between these three shots (other than load times)?





First one is quality setting of 100 in Lightroom (max) and 338 Kb.
Second one is quality 75 in lightroom and 139 kb.
Third one is quality 50 in Lightroom and 89 Kb.

So other than taking more time and disk space, what do you gain from the higher jpg quality setting?

The background is a bit more noisy in the 50 and the 75, but the 75 is certainly good enough.
The really subtle color gradations are better in the top one, but who would have noticed that if you just saw the bottom one?
So the extra 199 kb of data between the first two doesn't seem to add much other than download time and disk space

Sure there might be subtle pixel-peeper differences, but I think the middle one is certainly good enough to post and frankly the bottom one isn't really a problem, IMHO.

Frankly, if I just posted the last one would you have said "Yuch! Too much compression!"?
I doubt it.

Chris

[jfoureyes]

I just posted one at 900 and don't like the results it's just too big. The Max before was 800 on the long side and I think I'll stick with that for posting here or maybe even drop back to 750. The max files size is still 293 KB which is fine with me

[jeffkohn]

I now have a problem. I tried to upload the image after sizing it to 300ppi 800 pixels on the long side and quality 12. It shows file size 491kb file size but when I upload it, it comes to TPF at file size 68.5kb. What's up with that ??

The forum software will recompress JPG's that are above the size limit rather than rejecting them outright, so this is something to watch out for. The recompressed images will be noticeably softer and lacking in detail compared to your original. So if you're uploading as attachments make sure to keep the file size under the size limit. Even at 800 pixels in the long dimension you can hit the size limit if you save with quality=10 depending on how much detail there is in the image.

I used to limit my images to 700 tall or 800 wide, but I think more and more people are using larger displays now and this ends up being a little too small so I've upped the size by 100 pixels. I save with JPEG quality=10, which I've found to be pretty much indistinguishable from 11 or 12, but generates noticeably smaller files.

[CaptainTom]

Originally Posted by jeffkohn

The forum software will recompress JPG's that are above the size limit rather than rejecting them outright, so this is something to watch out for. The recompressed images will be noticeably softer and lacking in detail compared to your original. So if you're uploading as attachments make sure to keep the file size under the size limit. Even at 800 pixels in the long dimension you can hit the size limit if you save with quality=10 depending on how much detail there is in the image.

I used to limit my images to 700 tall or 800 wide, but I think more and more people are using larger displays now and this ends up being a little too small so I've upped the size by 100 pixels. I save with JPEG quality=10, which I've found to be pretty much indistinguishable from 11 or 12, but generates noticeably smaller files.

Thanks for the explanation. That's what I thought was going on but I'd never run across this before (knowingly). I'll keep an eye on them from now on.

[HeatherM]

What great information! Thanks so much!

[Ahh!]

Sorry. I was off topic.