Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: prepping files for forum display

  1. #11

    prepping files for forum display

    Quote Originally Posted by buggy
    The image always displays at 72 ppi on the computer screen so a setting other than 72 ppi is not necessary.
    Buggy, my screen is at 96 ppi -- 17" monitor with 1152x864 resolution (highest pixel count that doesn't cause eyestrain from small text and icons, and lets me keep 75 Hz scan rate). If my eyes were a little younger or my video card a little newer, I might run at 1280x960 (the more common 1280x1024 has non-square pixels on a standard 4:3 screen), which would be, I think, about 102 ppi.

  2. #12

    prepping files for forum display

    ImageMaker, Oh, I didn't know that. I'm on a 3 year old laptop so I'm not up with the latest technology. Maybe that's why my eyes are going bad...

  3. #13

    prepping files for forum display

    Hey, IM - thanks for the good advice!

  4. #14

    prepping files for forum display

    I think SVGA has been 96 dpi for many years, but books still talk about 72 which was VGA.

    There's an article on the web somewhere (Photo.net maybe) that has suggestions for scanning higher than needed resolution and how to do unsharp mask. I can't remember if it's before or after downsizing...I think before, so the reduction doesn't do as much 'harm.

    This may offend purists, but compression to put online is hardly 'au naturale'.

  5. #15

    prepping files for forum display

    Generally, a USM is best applied with the maximum of existing information (i.e. before resizing) and then a simple sharpen filter (a simpler algorithm that uniformly boosts local contrast) applied after resizing. Some folks like to resize in steps and sharpen after each step, but I don't see the utility in that; if the original scan is genuinely sharp to begin with, I have in the past often not bothered to sharpen at all.

    I've also noticed that if I sharpen more and then use more JPG compression (i.e. lower quality setting) to get the same file size, I get almost no visible difference in the image -- with JPG, a given amount of information (in the form of what's where) will give a certain file size, amost without regard for how you got there (except that if you try to use JPG compression to make the file too small, the artifacts of the wavelet compression algorithm get annoying).

  6. #16

    prepping files for forum display

    I USE RESIZE IMAGE (UNDER THE HELP DROP DOWN IN PS) - CHOOSE ONLINE DISPLAY-THEN MAKE PIC 500PIXELS ALONG ITS LONGEST EDGE- PRESS FINISH. THEN CHOOSE SAVE}SAVE FOR WEB AND SLIDE THE QUALITY SLIDER ALONG AND BACK UNTIL THE SIZE IS UNDER 100K THEN FINALLY SAVE AS } AND YOUR FILE NAME

    MY ORIGINALS ARE ALL TIFF FILES, DONT KNOW IF THAT MAKES ANY DIFFERNCE TO RESIZING :-/

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •