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 04 Mar 2014 (Tuesday) 14:31
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Why fb ruins my photos?

 
ekfaysal
Senior Member
Avatar
418 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 28
Joined Jun 2007
     
Mar 04, 2014 14:31 |  #1

i'm always uploading to Flickr and Facebook page and a few on my profile.
it works fine with FlickR but facebook ruined my images.
it softens my photos and the images looks not so neat. they way they look in lightroom/photoshop/Fl​ickr..
i even tried uploading bigger quality images/PNGs for web
they equally ruins them as well.
any spacific size/format that works well with Facebook?


My INSTAGRAM (external link)

Facebook page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
CoJM
Member
Avatar
186 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Sep 2012
Location: Boston MA
     
Mar 04, 2014 14:33 |  #2

I post images to my website and post a link.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phrasikleia
Goldmember
Avatar
1,828 posts
Likes: 14
Joined May 2008
Location: Based in California and Slovenia
     
Mar 04, 2014 14:38 |  #3

Supposedly photos appear best on FB if they are either 720 pixels or 960 pixels on the long side. At other sizes, FB's algorithm does some extra nasty compression on them. They still won't look as crispy as they should, so external links will always be better for image quality.


Photography by Erin Babnik (external link) | Newsletter (external link) | Photo Cascadia Team Member (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,209 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 1391
Joined Dec 2006
     
Mar 04, 2014 14:55 |  #4

Yeah facebook doesnt care about your images as most facebook photos are crap to begin with so they undergo some significant compression.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
moze229
Junior Member
Avatar
28 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2014
Location: Central NC
     
Mar 04, 2014 19:26 |  #5

gonzogolf wrote in post #16734349 (external link)
Yeah facebook doesnt care about your images as most facebook photos are crap to begin with so they undergo some significant compression.

^^^
This.

Most social websites - with the exception of those centered around photos - save space by using aggressive compression algorithms. Facebook would crash instantly if they tried to host all the photos on their servers at full quality.


600D / T3i, EF-S 18-55 IS II, EF-S 10-18 IS, EF-S 18-135, EF 50mm f/1.8 STM, Sigma 70-300 DG Macro NON-APO, EF-S 55-250mm STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 544
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Mar 04, 2014 21:33 |  #6

How "big" are the images you are uploading, that is, what are the pixel dimensions?

I ask because I typically upload images of two different dimensions. My Web "host" is one that I have over the years used for POTN posts, so I upload pics with the POTN-compliant dimensions (1024 pixels at the longest, although for horizontally-oriented pics I'll make it I believe 900 pixels at the longest...

My Web site (PBase) accepts and keeps the "original" but then also resizes the pics to three sizes, Small, Medium and Large, the "Large" being 800 pixels at the widest, I believe.

The thing that is important to me is that I can retrieve a copy of the original at my original resolution for posting. I don't have a complaint, and I never look at my smaller versions to compare.

Now FaceBook is a bit different, and Flickr is a bit different.

I'm not a Flickr user, but I know that if you are a paid "pro" user you can upload a full-rez image and they will keep it and make it available for viewing, the viewer chooses. I've seen good full-size images with Flickr, I typically go right there if viewing if I really want to appreciate the image.

FaceBook has implemented something interesting in recent months! They have started a "Full Screen View" mode in which, if you are viewing an image with a resolution that is equal or greater than your viewing screen you can choose to view in the "Full Screen View" mode and you will see that image fill your screen (without that pesky comments box getting in the way.

What this means is that you can upload fairly large images (larger than our POTN limits, up to what you would consider a "nice" resolution/viewing size. FaceBook does have some "levels" so they will likely resize a bit smaller, especially if they have to fit a smaller screen, but still, it is something to play with, and I've been quite happy with the results. I resize mine when i Export them from Lightroom to be very close to the viewing resolution/size if my "working" monitor, currently a fairly small and inexpensive one with a resolution of about 1600x1050 pixels, so when I view an image in Full Screen mode it nicely fills my screen! People with larger hi-res monitors will just see the "original" size (not enlarged), people with smaller screens will see a down-sized image. Also, if you don't go to the Full Screen mode you tend to see a down-sized image, one big reason why I point people to the Full Screen mode!

And, over the months since this feature has come out, I've tried to let people know if I do post a pic on FaceBook that "It's best if you view this pic in the Full Screen View mode!" and, over the months I've seen others pick up on that practice. And you know what, it can make a BIG difference in the viewing of your image!


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
moze229
Junior Member
Avatar
28 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2014
Location: Central NC
     
Mar 04, 2014 22:20 |  #7

Just for fun, what color space are you saving with? sRGB or Adobe? Probably not an issue, but something to think about. Browsers don't play well with Adobe RGB sometimes. Some people really notice the difference. Me, not so much.


600D / T3i, EF-S 18-55 IS II, EF-S 10-18 IS, EF-S 18-135, EF 50mm f/1.8 STM, Sigma 70-300 DG Macro NON-APO, EF-S 55-250mm STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ekfaysal
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
418 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 28
Joined Jun 2007
     
Mar 05, 2014 03:18 |  #8

moze229 wrote in post #16735238 (external link)
Just for fun, what color space are you saving with? sRGB or Adobe? Probably not an issue, but something to think about. Browsers don't play well with Adobe RGB sometimes. Some people really notice the difference. Me, not so much.


Using adobe RGB. will try sRGB as well


My INSTAGRAM (external link)

Facebook page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ekfaysal
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
418 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 28
Joined Jun 2007
     
Mar 05, 2014 03:19 |  #9

tonylong wrote in post #16735162 (external link)
How "big" are the images you are uploading, that is, what are the pixel dimensions?

I ask because I typically upload images of two different dimensions. My Web "host" is one that I have over the years used for POTN posts, so I upload pics with the POTN-compliant dimensions (1024 pixels at the longest, although for horizontally-oriented pics I'll make it I believe 900 pixels at the longest...

My Web site (PBase) accepts and keeps the "original" but then also resizes the pics to three sizes, Small, Medium and Large, the "Large" being 800 pixels at the widest, I believe.

The thing that is important to me is that I can retrieve a copy of the original at my original resolution for posting. I don't have a complaint, and I never look at my smaller versions to compare.

Now FaceBook is a bit different, and Flickr is a bit different.

I'm not a Flickr user, but I know that if you are a paid "pro" user you can upload a full-rez image and they will keep it and make it available for viewing, the viewer chooses. I've seen good full-size images with Flickr, I typically go right there if viewing if I really want to appreciate the image.

FaceBook has implemented something interesting in recent months! They have started a "Full Screen View" mode in which, if you are viewing an image with a resolution that is equal or greater than your viewing screen you can choose to view in the "Full Screen View" mode and you will see that image fill your screen (without that pesky comments box getting in the way.

What this means is that you can upload fairly large images (larger than our POTN limits, up to what you would consider a "nice" resolution/viewing size. FaceBook does have some "levels" so they will likely resize a bit smaller, especially if they have to fit a smaller screen, but still, it is something to play with, and I've been quite happy with the results. I resize mine when i Export them from Lightroom to be very close to the viewing resolution/size if my "working" monitor, currently a fairly small and inexpensive one with a resolution of about 1600x1050 pixels, so when I view an image in Full Screen mode it nicely fills my screen! People with larger hi-res monitors will just see the "original" size (not enlarged), people with smaller screens will see a down-sized image. Also, if you don't go to the Full Screen mode you tend to see a down-sized image, one big reason why I point people to the Full Screen mode!

And, over the months since this feature has come out, I've tried to let people know if I do post a pic on FaceBook that "It's best if you view this pic in the Full Screen View mode!" and, over the months I've seen others pick up on that practice. And you know what, it can make a BIG difference in the viewing of your image!

well, you are right. we can direct people to have a look at full screen. but the thing is, if they think the image is soft n noisy, most of them wont be opening it in Full screen.
i want a way that on normal screens it shud look sharper


My INSTAGRAM (external link)

Facebook page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Edsport
Senior Member
662 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Newfoundland Canada
     
Mar 05, 2014 06:13 |  #10

Convert to sRGB and save them no bigger than 960 pixels...


Cameras - Canon 350D, 5D
Lenses - Canon 18-55mm, 75-300mm, 50mm f/1.8, 24-105L, 24-70L
Flashes - Yongnuo YN460 II, YN468
RF-602 transmitter and 2 receivers

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Black ­ Mesa ­ Images
Senior Member
339 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2010
     
Mar 05, 2014 16:41 as a reply to  @ Edsport's post |  #11

Take note of what has been posted, and Google "Facebook picture posting" as there are several dead on tutorials out there that will help you out. Ever since I ran across one of those tutorials and implemented the suggestions, the pics I post to Facebook look good.


Instagram (external link)
Black Mesa Images on Facebook (external link)
Black Mesa Images Blog and Photography (external link)
Twitter (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pagman
I just hold the thing :-)
Avatar
8,890 posts
Gallery: 1993 photos
Likes: 9454
Joined Dec 2011
     
Mar 05, 2014 21:00 |  #12

FB is carp full stop, never used, never wanted to use it and never ever will.

Oh and another thing - FB keep your pics for life thay lock them in thier archieves somehow, and you can not delete them - i have been told from someone in the kno..


P.


Some stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1Tanker
Goldmember
Avatar
4,470 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Swaying to the Symphony of Destruction
     
Mar 05, 2014 21:16 |  #13

Pagman wrote in post #16737657 (external link)
FB is carp full stop, never used, never wanted to use it and never ever will.

Oh and another thing - FB keep your pics for life thay lock them in thier archieves somehow, and you can not delete them - i have been told from someone in the kno..


P.

It's cool that you know this, without even trying it. :rolleyes:


Kel
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pagman
I just hold the thing :-)
Avatar
8,890 posts
Gallery: 1993 photos
Likes: 9454
Joined Dec 2011
     
Mar 05, 2014 21:22 |  #14

1Tanker wrote in post #16737682 (external link)
It's cool that you know this, without even trying it. :rolleyes:

Have you discovered the same? its widely known about thier antics with peoples pictures.

P.


Some stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1Tanker
Goldmember
Avatar
4,470 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Swaying to the Symphony of Destruction
     
Mar 05, 2014 22:48 as a reply to  @ Pagman's post |  #15

Doesn't matter the site; once you post anything to the internet, it's out there for good.

Relax. People have accounts and don't post pictures, as well.


Kel
Gear

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

3,542 views & 0 likes for this thread
Why fb ruins my photos?
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 mcsdet
1514 guests, 279 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.