Retina display question

So, when I had a Macbook Air a few years ago with non-retina display, post processed my images at 1200x1800px, 72dpi and uploaded them to online photo sites, the pics opened through the browser at 100%, and at the size I processed them so the sharpness was retained. They essentially looked like how they did in Adobe Photoshop.

However, when I got a Macbook Pro with retina display and post processed them with the same settings, I noticed that the images were now showing in the browsers as if they were zoomed. The sharpness that I attained in post was now muddied because it was as if the browser (both Chrome and Safari) zoomed the size of the photo. It worried me that my pics were displaying in a browser differently then what I expected in Photoshop.

Anybody else notice this?

Well, the retina display has 4x the resolution so the photo is either the size of a postage stamp or the browser zooms it. Blowing up a 72dpi jpg isnt going to be pleasant. That's my best guess. There may something to alter in the display settings with regard to UI scaling. I would poke around in there to see if you can make it look better.

Dmab wrote in post #18306894
However, when I got a Macbook Pro with retina display and post processed them with the same settings, I noticed that the images were now showing in the browsers as if they were zoomed. The sharpness that I attained in post was now muddied because it was as if the browser (both Chrome and Safari) zoomed the size of the photo. It worried me that my pics were displaying in a browser differently then what I expected in Photoshop.

Just Kodak's way of getting back at Apple. Retina III "large C" shown; one of the late great "folders".

It is now standard practice for the very high resolution displays to scale the desktop. If they didn't then many graphical elements on the desktop would be so small as to be unusable. I use Win 10 with a Dell 27" 5K display, the same panel as in the 5K Retina iMac. The system now also scales all aspects of a web page, including images, so that page layout isn't broken. Since the screen is running at the full native resolution, and the content is being scaled by interpolation I don't see the quality being any lower than using a "normal" resolution monitor, and there is a possibility that it is actually reproduced at a better quality, since the final magnification ratio is the same in either case.

Also remember that you have zero control over how your image is displayed once you upload it to a web server. I would suggest that 99.8%+ of the monitors in use today have never been calibrated at any time, and bear little relationship to either sRGB or the generic colour profile supply by the manufacturer. Then remember that they will pretty much all be set to the blindingly bright default settings used in many retail environments. So worrying about this issue is probably a waste of effort, you just have to accept that colour and brightness will be well out of whack most of the time, and that most other IQ differences that are caused by the display system used are simply unobservable by the general public.

Alan

I heard many negative feedbacks about Macbook Air, especially about its "trimmed" memory. What do you think about it?

Apple is releasing a brand new 10K retina MacBook Pro with dual Nividia Titan XOX and Intel 9th gen i7 9990K 128core cpu based on their revolutionary 12 picometer Fonywell microarchitecture today, 2017-04-01.

Dmab wrote in post #18306894
So, when I had a Macbook Air a few years ago with non-retina display, post processed my images at 1200x1800px, 72dpi and uploaded them to online photo sites, the pics opened through the browser at 100%, and at the size I processed them so the sharpness was retained. They essentially looked like how they did in Adobe Photoshop.

However, when I got a Macbook Pro with retina display and post processed them with the same settings, I noticed that the images were now showing in the browsers as if they were zoomed. The sharpness that I attained in post was now muddied because it was as if the browser (both Chrome and Safari) zoomed the size of the photo. It worried me that my pics were displaying in a browser differently then what I expected in Photoshop.

Anybody else notice this?

process your photos at 200 percent instead of checking sharpness at 100 percent. i have a imac 5k and ran into the same issue. i also use a second monitor to check sharpness and noise. hope this helps you.

karolinmetzger wrote in post #18311359
I heard many negative feedbacks about Macbook Air, especially about its "trimmed" memory. What do you think about it?

I have had a mac air for 2 years/4 months and use it every day for work. I moved my photos to it also (using aperture) and have had no issues with 'trimmed' memory. I bought it fully spect'ed i7,8 gig ram, 500 gb flash.

Recently my 5 year 5 month old iMAC 27 died (again, repaired at just under 3 years with warrantee) and I needed to either get a display to use with the MacAir or a new iMac. After debating and actually running the Mac Air with an external display I decided to go for the new iMac. I could not see spending a grand on a display (was using my son's Apple Display) vs. just buying the new iMac 5k.

But as far as the Mac Air is concerned, I can easily go through my photos and work with them on the smaller display on the Mac Air and do not yet find the 500 gb to be an issue. It has a thunderbolt connection.

I run Parallels so I can run windows 7 for the two apps I need it for, Quicken, the Mac OS version of Quicken is still pretty bad, and HanDBase data base, and again the Mac OS version of HanDBase has never been fully implemented.

As far as the original post question, now that I have the 5k display I'll be learning how to adjust to that. LOL.

Mike