Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 20 Nov 2013 (Wednesday) 22:46
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

My images lose quality after uploading, even after resizing to recommended size

 
Snowyman
Goldmember
Avatar
3,739 posts
Gallery: 257 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1847
Joined Oct 2011
     
Nov 23, 2013 03:49 |  #16

Looks a whole lot better and a lot softer which is good for portraits and skin but perhaps not always what you are wanting.

As Tony says, if you are exporting jpeg from LR and editing that jpeg in Photoshop you are multiplying artefacts.


Snowy's Gear
Deviant Art (external link)
Flickr (external link)
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
amonline
Goldmember
Avatar
3,558 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2006
     
Nov 23, 2013 19:45 |  #17

Yes. As I mentioned earlier; if you take an image from LR to PS, output it at full res (PSD) and do your resizing in PS instead.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Naraly
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
221 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Feb 2012
Location: California
     
Nov 25, 2013 01:10 |  #18

tonylong wrote in post #16473684 (external link)
Naraly, it's late, so quickly:

When you "Save As" in Photoshop after doing a Lightroom Export, then you are re-compressing the image, which can be a bad thing! Check out you workflow, and we can help you!!!

amonline wrote in post #16475249 (external link)
Yes. As I mentioned earlier; if you take an image from LR to PS, output it at full res (PSD) and do your resizing in PS instead.


Ahh ok, I did not understand that earlier, but that explains a lot. Because I have recently been editing in Lightroom, saving the image as a JPEG, and then uploading to photoshop, and doing "save as" again. I really don't know why I'm doing this, I use PS mostly for sharpening in selected areas, which I can do in Lightroom, but I'm just not used to it I guess.

Would it be better to edit in PS, then save as PSD and edit in LR, or edit in Lightroom and select "edit in photoshop" which automatically opens the image in PS as a TIF file?



Cheers,
Nora

-->Facebook (external link)Instagram (external link)<--

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 544
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Nov 25, 2013 02:38 |  #19

In Lightroom, edit as much Raw as you can. Then, you can use Edit in Photoshop as needed -- you can choose in your Preferances to either edit as a till or a psd.


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rongnongno
Mostly Lurking
14 posts
Joined Nov 2013
Location: Varies with time and seemingly age
     
Nov 25, 2013 10:11 |  #20

What you must understand on the web...

When ever you post an image, even if you a adjust to their so-called requirements the image is reprocessed by them as a level of compression that is destructive.

The only way to control this is to post your image(s) as a link from a web site YOU control. To respect their wishes create something that is within their parameters and everyone is happy.

That is all there is to this. And, NO, this is not 'only you'.


I am not an artist, I am a witness and a voyeur

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
zackysmith
Hatchling
1 post
Joined Feb 2014
     
Feb 26, 2014 00:38 |  #21

Naraly wrote in post #16468303 (external link)
I just don't get what I'm doing wrong. I shoot in RAW and post process in light room or sometimes photoshop. Before uploading an image (external link) online, I resize the image (external link) to 960 pixels on the longest side and the resolution to 2048. On my computer they look fine, the quality is good, it's smooth where it's supposed to be and sharp where it's supposed to be.

But that changes significantly when I upload the image online. At least, I never noticed how much until I looked at the uploaded images on my new laptop. They look rough, mostly on the skin or any part where it's a single color and where it should be smooth. If I open up that same photo from my computer files, it looks good, but not on the website I uploaded it to.

The members in this forum are really active, and I have to read all the posts to find the possible right answers. It will be great if you can mark one as a verified question. :)
Ok, back to the point. I need to upload an image to website. The image in my computer is great, but once I put it in the website, it looks horribly. But the image sizes in my computer and web server are the same. So I have no idea what to do. I guess you must have read all the replies in this thread, can you give me some suggestion? I also took the image in RAW.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,475 posts
Likes: 196
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
Feb 26, 2014 04:14 |  #22

can you give me some suggestion?

Can you give use some information?
Just saying, "I have a problem," rarely elicits a meaningful response.
Can you describe the problem with a little more detail than "looks horribly"?
What color space. What web site? What image size? What browser? What monitor? What did you eat for breakfast?


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,738 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 8034
Joined Oct 2009
     
Feb 27, 2014 01:16 |  #23

Naraly wrote in post #16477991 (external link)
Ahh ok, I did not understand that earlier, but that explains a lot. Because I have recently been editing in Lightroom, saving the image as a JPEG, and then uploading to photoshop, and doing "save as" again. I really don't know why I'm doing this, I use PS mostly for sharpening in selected areas, which I can do in Lightroom, but I'm just not used to it I guess.

Would it be better to edit in PS, then save as PSD and edit in LR, or edit in Lightroom and select "edit in photoshop" which automatically opens the image in PS as a TIF file?

You are making more work for yourself. If you work in LR, save an image as a Jpeg, then open it in PS and do more sharpening that is destructive editing. I would just work in LR and when you are done use the export page. Experiment with the sharpening there. Like Tony said if you need to go into PS then just select edit in PS. When done select "save" and then it sends the image back to LR. I have it coming back as a Tiff. Then just export as a Jpeg.

When working in PS do the same, just stay in there. There are many sharpening methods.

These videos may help you.

http://www.youtube.com …4mV3NsLmXw&feat​ure=relmfu (external link)

http://www.youtube.com …ure=player_embe​dded#at=20 (external link)

By the way DPI has nothing to do with screen resolution. It is for print only. You can set to 1 or 1000 and it won't make a difference.

http://www.rideau-info.com/photos/mythdp​i.html (external link)


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,001 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1615
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Feb 27, 2014 07:11 |  #24

digital paradise wrote in post #16720935 (external link)
By the way DPI has nothing to do with screen resolution. It is for print only. You can set to 1 or 1000 and it won't make a difference.

Although the DPI tag in the embbedded metadata is normally superflous and not really used for anything, it can be important when exporting or printing from Lightroom. The value set for DPI, along with the destination type and amount are used by LR to determin the amount of output sharpening applied to the image. When exporrting from LR I always ensure that the settings are apropriate for the intended use. Images for the web for example I export at a DPI setting of 100 to reflect the average true resolution of modern displays, I also use Screen as the destination type, along with either medium or high as the amount setting. For prints then the settings are apropriate for the paper type and printer I am using.

Remember that this only applies for the actual export from LR when using LR's export sharpening. Otherwise the DPI setting value is almost completly irrelavent and could be set to any value you like.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,738 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 8034
Joined Oct 2009
     
Feb 27, 2014 07:27 |  #25

I use LR for mass editing so it usually it is on paper and at 300. I also include a set of web viewing size files (800 on the long side) and my export preset is set to screen and the DPI lower just to keep the file size lower.

That Pixel Genius group developed output sharpening for LR. I know there is a lot going on in the background during LR export sharpening so that would not surprise me. It does make sense from the sharpening end, not screen resolution. Where can I get more info on this? I am going to put that to the test today.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,738 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 8034
Joined Oct 2009
     
Feb 27, 2014 08:39 |  #26

I have to wonder why the LR developers would have sharpening be effected in this manner. Why not just put an override in the background. Most images for screen won't exceed 1200 on the long side I don't think so export sharpening could sharpen for about that average - 800 to 1200 on the long side regardless of DPI setting.

How many people would even know this? If I were designing it I would have that type of override and just make the DPI grey out when you switch to screen and the sharpening averages out for around 100 DPI. At least then people would ask why is it greying out and learn about the process.

I rarely view anything from LR on the screen. I do my 800 on the long side for customers as a quick view and sharing only. For all personal stuff I use hybrid of the two Adobe videos in post #23 along with an edge sharpening method called Really Smart Sharpening using PS for output sharpening. I like the control I have. It took me two years and 3 free LR trials to get used to and accept output sharpening. I don't print. Test prints at a good local printer proved it does a very good job and now I trust it.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,738 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 8034
Joined Oct 2009
     
Feb 27, 2014 11:05 |  #27

A question Nora. Who do you use as a host site? I use Photobucket and Flicker and images from both look the same as they do on my desktop. I don't use flicker much but I see there is some size information regarding images. Maybe 960 on the long side is not the best to use depending on the host.

Everyone else. Does Facebook alter images to save on space or something else like that? I don't use it.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nonnit
Senior Member
Avatar
361 posts
Gallery: 22 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 221
Joined Oct 2012
     
Feb 27, 2014 11:26 |  #28

BigAl007 wrote in post #16721238 (external link)
Although the DPI tag in the embbedded metadata is normally superflous and not really used for anything, it can be important when exporting or printing from Lightroom. The value set for DPI, along with the destination type and amount are used by LR to determin the amount of output sharpening applied to the image. When exporrting from LR I always ensure that the settings are apropriate for the intended use. Images for the web for example I export at a DPI setting of 100 to reflect the average true resolution of modern displays, I also use Screen as the destination type, along with either medium or high as the amount setting. For prints then the settings are apropriate for the paper type and printer I am using.

Remember that this only applies for the actual export from LR when using LR's export sharpening. Otherwise the DPI setting value is almost completly irrelavent and could be set to any value you like.

Alan

If the resolution value effects screen sharpening on export then why does the image look exactly the same on the screen with different values like:1 or 9999 or 100?


Nonnit
5DMKIII // 70-200mm f2.8 L II // 35mm f2.0 IS // 50mm f1.4 // 85mm f1.8 // 100mm f2.8 Macro // 135mm f2.0 L // stuff
Film: https://www.flickr.com​/photos/souloffilm/ (external link)
Film: https://www.instagram.​com/souloffilm/ (external link)
Digital: http://nonnitryggva.is (external link) //

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nonnit
Senior Member
Avatar
361 posts
Gallery: 22 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 221
Joined Oct 2012
     
Feb 27, 2014 11:54 |  #29

nathancarter wrote in post #16469213 (external link)
Facebook is going to heavily compress it, for the purposes of conserving their own disk space, and making a speedy browsing experience for their users.

Additionally, Facebook viewers aren't going to go into full-screen mode on every image; so Facebook will be resampling it to show it in their browser, at somewhat smaller than 2048px. The one you're showing above is 960px on the long edge, so it's been resized/resampled/comp​ressed/folded/mutilate​d at least once along the way, if you uploaded it at 2048px.

I don't use Model Mayhem very much, but I think their methods are probably similar.

I publish to Facebook at 1024px on the long edge, and 100% jpeg quality. That way, when Facebook applies their own ImageMangler(tm) compression, at least they're starting with the best jpeg I can give 'em, and hopefully they're not scaling it down too much.

In my my experience facebook looks great when uploading big files like 2048 or 1600 on the long edge, with 960 or 1024 on the long edge the quality is butchered.

I just noticed something similar happening with flickr :(


500px looks sharp!

My advice to the OP is to try uploading bigger files and see what happens.

And try 500px.


Nonnit
5DMKIII // 70-200mm f2.8 L II // 35mm f2.0 IS // 50mm f1.4 // 85mm f1.8 // 100mm f2.8 Macro // 135mm f2.0 L // stuff
Film: https://www.flickr.com​/photos/souloffilm/ (external link)
Film: https://www.instagram.​com/souloffilm/ (external link)
Digital: http://nonnitryggva.is (external link) //

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,738 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 8034
Joined Oct 2009
     
Feb 27, 2014 12:28 |  #30

Thanks. I thought I had read something about FB. 500px is a good site. We just did a PB/Flicker comparison.

Post #16. Both look just as good as when I view from my desktop.

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1362089


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

9,634 views & 0 likes for this thread
My images lose quality after uploading, even after resizing to recommended size
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is miltiades
2011 guests, 314 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.