Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Sharing Knowhow' section > Presentation
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 8th of June 2012 (Fri)   #1
dkizzle
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 629
Default Quality of web images

What resolution / quality / ppi do you set on your web images?

I am working on my website right now and exported my photos at 1.0 mp, 80% quality and 120 ppi. I am wondering if this is good enough or if I should bump it up to 1.3 mp & maybe 85% quality?
dkizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 8th of June 2012 (Fri)   #2
smclaren
Member
 
smclaren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 210
Default Re: Quality of web images

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkizzle View Post
What resolution / quality / ppi do you set on your web images?

I am working on my website right now and exported my photos at 1.0 mp, 80% quality and 120 ppi. I am wondering if this is good enough or if I should bump it up to 1.3 mp & maybe 85% quality?

I usually sizes 640px X 420px, 72dpi, jpeg level 9: www.stevemclaren.com
smclaren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th of June 2012 (Fri)   #3
dkizzle
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 629
Default Re: Quality of web images

Thats below what I set mine to. What do others do?
dkizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 8th of June 2012 (Fri)   #4
tracknut
Senior Member
 
tracknut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Folsom, California
Posts: 1,740
Default Re: Quality of web images

640px wide, 80% quality is the most I put on my site and what I sell as a "web image".

ppi/dpi is irrelevant, I have no idea why in 2012 it keeps coming in to the discussion!

Dave
__________________
Performance/sport dog photographer
Facebook
"Always available to shoot your dog"
tracknut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th of June 2012 (Sat)   #5
renlok
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 248
Default Re: Quality of web images

I seem to be bumping up my images, started on 640px on the longest edge, then up to 800px and now I'm exporting at 1200px usually 60-80%.
__________________
Renlok
Canon 70D | 35L | Sigma 24-105 | 100L | 85 | Sigma 150-500
renlok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th of June 2012 (Sun)   #6
Hikin Mike
Walkin' Like a Penguin Now!
 
Hikin Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Atwater, CA
Posts: 6,131
Default Re: Quality of web images

On my website, I use 600px around 70-80%. When I post here, I use 720px.
__________________
Images in the Backcountry | Facebook | Google+ | Twitter
SEO for the Photographer | Creating HDRs Using Layer Masks
Canon 5D 17-40 /4L 300 /4L IS 70-200 /4L 50 /1.8 1.4x TC Kenko Ext. Tubes
Hikin Mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of June 2012 (Wed)   #7
TPhantom
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Orlando
Posts: 33
Default Re: Quality of web images

I was told 900X600 and 72dpi for web.
TPhantom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of June 2012 (Wed)   #8
Christopher Steven b
Goldmember
 
Christopher Steven b's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 3,429
Default Re: Quality of web images

I have a lot of 1200 pixel wide shots on my (wedding) site. My aim is for folks to get a better sense of the quality (in terms of noise, focus selection, crispness) of my work before they even meet me. I think it's mainly because of this that I very seldom get requests to see more photos, larger res. versions, prints etc.
__________________

christopher steven b. - Ottawa Wedding Photographer

Ottawa Wedding Photography Site | Ottawa Wedding Photographer Blog

Christopher Steven b is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of June 2012 (Wed)   #9
Todd Lambert
I don't like titles
 
Todd Lambert's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 10K' up - Florissant, Colorado
Posts: 12,460
Default Re: Quality of web images

1024 on the longest side for me. Not much you can do with a 1024 image and honestly, even if they do, what am I really losing? They weren't going to pay anyways.

I like my images to be large enough to satisfy anyone looking at them. I may actually start going even larger soon, since retina displays will start becoming more pertinent.
__________________
50in52.com - 50 States In 52 Weeks - The Ultimate Photography Roadtrip

Sony A7R & A7S > Canon 5D3 & 5D2 | 8-15L | Nikon 14-24 | 16-35L II | 17 TS-E | 24 TS-E II | 24-105L | 24L II | 35L | 85L II | 135L
Gitzo 1544T | Gitzo 3531S | Gitzo 5562GTS | Acratech heads
Todd Lambert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of June 2012 (Wed)   #10
joedlh
Goldmember
 
joedlh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Long Island, NY, North America, Sol III, Orion Spur of the Milky Way galaxy.
Posts: 4,553
Default Re: Quality of web images

Usually 700 pixels on the long side. Monitors (Apple Retina excepted) are usually 72 dpi. I don't generally pay attention to quality except for this forum which has a 150kb maximum. Even with the higher resolution monitor, I wouldn't put up greater resolution as it would make the images more useful to thieves.
__________________
Joe

Gear: Kodak Instamatic, Polaroid Swinger. Oh you meant gear now.
http://photo.joedlh.net
joedlh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of June 2012 (Wed)   #11
Todd Lambert
I don't like titles
 
Todd Lambert's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 10K' up - Florissant, Colorado
Posts: 12,460
Default Re: Quality of web images

I guess I don't get the whole theft part. I mean, if someone uses an image on the web somewhere, it's not hurting you/me? What does it matter? I'll issue a DMCA and be done with it. If it's a credible company, then legal proceeding will follow, but otherwise, it's not worth any more effort than the DMCA to remove it.

I can see only posting small watermarked files for things like wedding proofs, sports photos, etc.. but otherwise, it doesn't make any sense to me.

I'm starting to really think along the same lines as Trey Ratcliffe: http://www.stuckincustoms.com/2012/0...ace-pinterest/
__________________
50in52.com - 50 States In 52 Weeks - The Ultimate Photography Roadtrip

Sony A7R & A7S > Canon 5D3 & 5D2 | 8-15L | Nikon 14-24 | 16-35L II | 17 TS-E | 24 TS-E II | 24-105L | 24L II | 35L | 85L II | 135L
Gitzo 1544T | Gitzo 3531S | Gitzo 5562GTS | Acratech heads
Todd Lambert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of June 2012 (Wed)   #12
joedlh
Goldmember
 
joedlh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Long Island, NY, North America, Sol III, Orion Spur of the Milky Way galaxy.
Posts: 4,553
Default Re: Quality of web images

Hey Todd,

I hope your comment wasn't a direct response to mine. If it was, then I am guilty of being too abbreviated in my comment. I don't use water marks. I agree that they deface the image. I use an unobtrusive by-line. And all of my images have a creative commons copyright notice in the exif data, which is very much along the lines of the photographer whose link you posted. I've seen lots of my images used all over the Internet without my permission. I've never issued a DMCA e-mail for any of them. My big concern is that somebody might be tempted to use one of them to generate revenue and not give me a fair portion. And I don't want to spend time hunting down this kind of mischief. That's why I post low resolution images. It keeps me from having to scour the Internet with Tin Eye on a regular basis for every shot that I think has commercial potential. And the 700 pixel shots look pretty good. I've been contacted by museums, researchers, and graduate students who graciously request permission to use some of my images. In support of science, culture, and the arts (and, yes, to get my stuff out there), I have sent them the high res shots pro bono. One time a Fortune 500 company wanted to use one of my shots in an advertising campaign. They paid. I wonder if I would have been faced with a disagreeable incident similar to what Trey Ratcliffe reported with Time if I had posted a high res shot. I think my approach is pretty practical.
__________________
Joe

Gear: Kodak Instamatic, Polaroid Swinger. Oh you meant gear now.
http://photo.joedlh.net
joedlh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th of June 2012 (Wed)   #13
Todd Lambert
I don't like titles
 
Todd Lambert's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 10K' up - Florissant, Colorado
Posts: 12,460
Default Re: Quality of web images

Nah, Joe... I wasn't specifically referring to you at all, sorry for the confusion. I was making a more general statement/question.

It sounds like your thinking is very similar to mine and Trey Ratcliffe's actually.

I just question how much good it does to make your images small, watermarked, etc.. in the name of preventing theft [scratch that... copyright violation]. I am starting to not really care much about where my images end up unless it's a fortune 500 company as you indicated. Smaller companies, I'll pursue if I feel it's warranted, but a lot of times it's not worth the effort especially fly-by-nights operating out of the country, etc... which is where the DMCA takedown can be effective to at least remove the image from their site.

As I said earlier, I don't question this tactic for things like portraits and wedding photos etc.. where a bride WILL print something if it's not made small or unusable.

Otherwise, I think it's chasing things and expending time on something that doesn't return any monies - so essentially a waste of time that might be better spent on shooting or marketing the shots you've already taken.
__________________
50in52.com - 50 States In 52 Weeks - The Ultimate Photography Roadtrip

Sony A7R & A7S > Canon 5D3 & 5D2 | 8-15L | Nikon 14-24 | 16-35L II | 17 TS-E | 24 TS-E II | 24-105L | 24L II | 35L | 85L II | 135L
Gitzo 1544T | Gitzo 3531S | Gitzo 5562GTS | Acratech heads
Todd Lambert is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Posting quality images here Whip7605 Presentation 8 17th of December 2010 (Fri) 16:46
How to get that nice quality of images :? doovade RAW, Post Processing and Printing 24 24th of May 2010 (Mon) 16:37
Vintage Quality Images - How to? Raginl3ull RAW, Post Processing and Printing 1 17th of July 2009 (Fri) 15:26
Lr 1.1 produces bad quality images Leandro Bento RAW, Post Processing and Printing 10 29th of July 2007 (Sun) 16:11
Hi Quality Images from a Rebel Malok Presentation 26 8th of October 2004 (Fri) 15:37


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:22.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.