Dispair, web images not as sharp as on my monitor.

[Dave in Wales]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The images on 'my' monitor are pin, pin sharp, both SOOC JPG's and RAW.

It all goes wrong between resizing/sharpening>Flickr>and the web display.

I use two editing suites, PSE 13 and LR6.

PSE 13 I use for JPG's, resized and sharpened using the Steve Perry plug-in.... https://www.slrlounge.com/resize-sharpen-images-web-using-photoshop-instead-lightroom/

I use LR6 for RAW and export them resized/sharpened as JPG's for web viewing.

Using either method produces images that are not as sharp as they were before resizing/sharpening.

Uploading to Flickr does not do them any favours either.

 

HELP, is there a way of getting my web images to look the same as they do before resizing/sharpening?

Edited May 5, 2019 by Dave in Wales

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jaapv]

Hard to tell without seeing your precise workflow. It is not unusual for downsized images to need a touch of sharpening.  I use high-pass layer sharpening in Photoshop if needed.

[adan]

Well:

1) sure, you lose some sharpness with resizing - you are reducing your original 18-24 megapixels to 2.5 megapixels or so.

1A) There are usually options for the algorithm used in resizing. E.G., Photoshop gives options for "Bicubic sharper" or "Bicubic smoother" in addition to the default or basic "Bicubic."

2) Either a .DNG, or a .JPG original, saved (or resaved) for web use, involves lossy .jpg compression. You can adjust that somewhat by way of the .jpg "quality" or "percent" amount, but it can't be eliminated entirely. If you want to squeeze 2.5 (or 10 Mb) of picture into 500Kb or 1Mb of data, something's gotta give.

3) A factor affecting "apparent" sharpness is whether the image is converted to the sRGB color space for Web use. Not all browsers are "color-space aware" and if they try to display an image still in Adobe 1998 color space, but assuming it is in the web-default sRGB color space, the pictures will display with less saturation and contrast, making them look dull. And that will also make them "appear" a bit less crisp and sharp.

4) Finally, any given web site may recompress whatever you upload, to save space on their servers. No way around that.

My own workflow is:

- resize with Photoshop's "image Size" dialogue to final size, using "Bicubic" algorithm

- Run Photoshop's "Sharpen" filter

- Fade that filter effect ~50%, judging the fading amount by eye (less fading = more sharpness, but occasionally jaggies in thin lines or other artifacts). More flexible and controllable than the one-size-fits-all "Bicubic Sharper" option.

- use Photoshop "Save for Web" option to save the final web-intended image. This also allows me to: automatically convert to sRGB, adjust the compression amount per image to just fit the web site restrictions (e.g. 500Kb on this forum for regular members), strip out the metadata (not anyone's business but my own), and rename the file as desired.

[Dave in Wales]

On 5/6/2019 at 6:21 PM, adan said:

Well:

1) sure, you lose some sharpness with resizing - you are reducing your original 18-24 megapixels to 2.5 megapixels or so.

1A) There are usually options for the algorithm used in resizing. E.G., Photoshop gives options for "Bicubic sharper" or "Bicubic smoother" in addition to the default or basic "Bicubic."

2) Either a .DNG, or a .JPG original, saved (or resaved) for web use, involves lossy .jpg compression. You can adjust that somewhat by way of the .jpg "quality" or "percent" amount, but it can't be eliminated entirely. If you want to squeeze 2.5 (or 10 Mb) of picture into 500Kb or 1Mb of data, something's gotta give.

3) A factor affecting "apparent" sharpness is whether the image is converted to the sRGB color space for Web use. Not all browsers are "color-space aware" and if they try to display an image still in Adobe 1998 color space, but assuming it is in the web-default sRGB color space, the pictures will display with less saturation and contrast, making them look dull. And that will also make them "appear" a bit less crisp and sharp.

4) Finally, any given web site may recompress whatever you upload, to save space on their servers. No way around that.

My own workflow is:

- resize with Photoshop's "image Size" dialogue to final size, using "Bicubic" algorithm

- Run Photoshop's "Sharpen" filter

- Fade that filter effect ~50%, judging the fading amount by eye (less fading = more sharpness, but occasionally jaggies in thin lines or other artifacts). More flexible and controllable than the one-size-fits-all "Bicubic Sharper" option.

- use Photoshop "Save for Web" option to save the final web-intended image. This also allows me to: automatically convert to sRGB, adjust the compression amount per image to just fit the web site restrictions (e.g. 500Kb on this forum for regular members), strip out the metadata (not anyone's business but my own), and rename the file as desired.

Thank you very much adan, I'm going to have to read/digest/trial this at length. My one disadvantage is I don't have PS just LR6.

Dave

[frame-it]

30 minutes ago, Dave in Wales said:

My one disadvantage is I don't have PS just LR6.

Dave

in LR6:

set longest edge size to - 1280

size - 490kb

sharpening - high

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

FUJI GFX50R + Leica 90mm APO Summicron M ASPH

 

and this is very close to the original

 

Edited May 8, 2019 by frame-it

[Dave in Wales]

1 hour ago, frame-it said:

in LR6:

set longest edge size to - 1280

size - 490kb

sharpening - high

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

FUJI GFX50R + Leica 90mm APO Summicron M ASPH

 

and this is very close to the original

 

Thanks, that is basically what I do.

[Luke_Miller]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I use a 4K monitor and had a similar problem viewing my jpeg galleries in my web browsers.  In my case the browser would upsize images that were smaller than screen resolution.  That made them very soft.  My solution was to set a browser zoom level of 67 - 80% to correct for this.  Even on an HD monitor I expect the same can occur if the images are smaller than screen resolution.

Edited May 8, 2019 by Luke_Miller

[Dave in Wales]

15 hours ago, Luke_Miller said:

I use a 4K monitor and had a similar problem viewing my jpeg galleries in my web browsers.  In my case the browser would upsize images that were smaller than screen resolution.  That made them very soft.  My solution was to set a browser zoom level of 67 - 80% to correct for this.  Even on an HD monitor I expect the same can occur if the images are smaller than screen resolution.

Thank you, that makes such sense.

[Dave in Wales]

The Dehaze slider or plugin for LR6 can also improve matters.

Used discretely it can add that 'pop' and also apparently increase sharpness, probably by contrast manipulation.

Two shots below, top...no Dehaze, lower...slight Dehaze, my wife describes the difference as 'it looks as if its been 'washed' couldn't put it better myself 

The lower picture is on the tilt intentionally for my own record purposes

No Dehaze

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Dehaze

Edited May 28, 2019 by Dave in Wales