Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

Editing for the Gallery


StrayCat e2
10 15.5k 2 Canada
30 Aug 2014 9:12PM
I must have had the same problem with Chrome and Firefox. I must do a search to see if I can just increase text size.

Thanks

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Chris_L e2
1.5k United Kingdom
30 Aug 2014 10:02PM
That is the mystery solved. It's the reason that your images look wrong after you have uploaded them. You are telling your browser to artificially magnify them.

Other people's would also look wrong - you wouldn't know that because you wouldn't have local copies of their images to compare with.

You would have had the same problem with any browser, some are a little better than others at magnifying images.

Try to find a way to increase the size of only text and to leave images unmolested set that zoom to 100% (actual size)

It used to possible in IE then they changed stuff around and I never use it.
StrayCat e2
10 15.5k 2 Canada
30 Aug 2014 10:18PM
Chris, one question, why is it only a problem with viewing the images after they've been uploaded to the site, they are normal when viewed with the same settings outside the site. With the zoom set at 125%, the images are normal when I view them in IE before uploading to Epz, the same as they are in LR and PS, etc. When I upload I have to change to 100%, it doesn't make sense to me, it's still IE, after all.
StrayCat e2
10 15.5k 2 Canada
30 Aug 2014 10:29PM
Disregard. I've been selecting view in IE from LR, and it's been sending it to Picasa Viewer.Tongue
Chris_L e2
1.5k United Kingdom
30 Aug 2014 10:35PM
You could have solved this ages ago you daft so-and-so! Blush

Ten hours ago I asked you about the zoom, for weeks myself and others have been telling you to view your image locally in your browser... I'm glad it's solved, but I wish you could see the logic yourself. That's a 1000 pixel wide image and you are telling your browser to stretch it to 1250 or whatever size you zoom to. Those extra pixels don't come from your camera, they are interpolated.
banehawi e2
10 979 2981 Canada
31 Aug 2014 12:17AM
Chris and for anyone following along.


Heres a link to look at : http://www.ephotozine.com/photo/two-heads-40654849/large#edit_box

There are version v3 - v6, all of the spider shot.

V3, I received Dennys shot in email, and uploaded it from PS with no changes, and EPZ resizing.

V4, I resized myself, and added a klittle sharpening, I thought the original, V3 a touch soft (also in the original email, so nothing to do with EPZ)

V5 is the original email version, resized by EPZ, but with sharpening applied by me.

V6 is an image where the image from Dennys PF is at the top, and the Image from V3, as emailed is at the bottom.

Theres is a noticeable difference between them.

So any comments or insights would be appreciated. This has nothing to do with browsers or browser viewing percentages.

I will continue to give it some thought too, but dont hold back, Neither image in the V6 comparison was altered in any way by me.


Willie
Chris_L e2
1.5k United Kingdom
31 Aug 2014 12:46AM

Quote:This has nothing to do with browsers or browser viewing percentages.


I'm sorry but I think you're wrong. It's got everything to do with browser viewing percentages. I can open IE, load up the gallery pages and spoil pretty much any photo by digitally zooming it to 125%

Furthermore you're comparing images that you've downloaded from epz (after being resized by the site) against ones you received via email (at another compression level)( which you've captioned and recompressed and reuploaded.

Look at this photograph, keep looking at it, hold down the control (ctrl) key and press the + key a few times. Digital zoom, horrible.

31-08-2014-00-51-09.jpg

banehawi e2
10 979 2981 Canada
31 Aug 2014 2:02AM
No Im sorry Chris, but you are not following my logic at all!

I dont disagree Chris that browsers play a role, but Im not yet convinced that is Dennys issue for certain. I am well aware that viewing at other than 100% will cause lots of issues. What I saying is that the subtle differebces I see cannot be explained to my satisfaction by browser zooming, yet.

You have not taken into account that the image I received was uploaded by EPZ, using the EPZ process, and looks different to the image uploaded by Denny using precisely the same process. The difference is not browser here in this case, its that Im in a different place to Denny, which means nothing. The difference Denny can see when he views my V3, is precisely what I see when I view his portfilio. That suggests a browser for sure, BUT I cant conclude thats the issue yet,, because:

What I did find, after some digging, is that the image uploaded by Denny has an original ppi of 300; whereas the one I was sent via mail is 350ppi. No material difference at all in the images when viewed, BUT it does suggest to me that what I have received, and what was uploaded are not the same. And I mean that one of them has had the image size altered. Thats where I would like to pursue at this point. It is entirely possible that there is a browser issue underlying this, I would like to prove it, not speculate about it, and also copver the compression methods used.

Once I receive an image that is the same one that was uploaded to the portfolio, I will be in a better position. Right now, Im not comfortable with the fact that the image uploaded by Denny, and the version mailed to be are identical in every way.

So, it would be helpful if you could review what I have said, and comment on why you see a significant difference in the "presumably" identical image uploaded to the exact same place with the exact same process, viewed by your own browser.

Willie
Chris_L e2
1.5k United Kingdom
31 Aug 2014 2:20AM

Quote:What I did find, after some digging, is that the image uploaded by Denny has an original ppi of 300; whereas the one I was sent via mail is 350ppi. No material difference at all in the images when viewed, BUT it does suggest to me that what I have received, and what was uploaded are not the same. And I mean that one of them has had the image size altered.


Willie, I'm sure you are well-intentioned but you are getting the wrong end of the stick. PPI is a label and has no bearing on anything here ( further reading ) If you are saying it shows that it's not the same as the one emailed to you, of course it's not. The fact that you have two different images is correct.


Quote:"one of them has had the image size altered"

Yes, Denny clearly said he uploaded it to epz and let epz resize it - that's why it's different to the one he emailed you.
banehawi e2
10 979 2981 Canada
31 Aug 2014 2:43AM
As I mentioned Chris, I know PPI has no bearing on anything; OTHER than the image I was sent, and the one uploaded MAY be different simply because ONE change was made to one, and NOT the other. This makes me want to rule out that other changes may have been made.

EPZ did NOT resize the 350 PPI image to 300 PPI, - it left it as it was. They dont touch PPI at all, for precisely the reason you point out.

Im not well intentioned Chris, I am very interested in this. I simply want to get to the end of this conclusively, and with no doubt, so Denny gets sorted out.

The proof will be that Denny says, that it, Im happy, I understand.

I would be happy to chat on wbaneham@gmail.com to take this off-line.
Chris_L e2
1.5k United Kingdom
31 Aug 2014 4:04AM
No, I'm through with it, hide topic as far as I'm concerned. If you are using browser "zoom" then images on screen will be affected for the worse. You aren't viewing them at 1:1 - Fact.

Secondly you are expressing surprise that the file you got from epz of Denny's image has differences to the fiile that he sent you via email. Of course it is! That simply is not in dispute. It's meant to be different. Did you read what he said. Highlighted in yellow.

31-08-2014-03-55-07.jpg



How could you possibly expect it to be the same file after epz "did the resizing"?

To reiterate, I can't make it any plainer, The file you got from the site is not the file he uploaded. He let epz do the resizing. Epz took the file he uploaded, resized it, saved a new file, that's the one you got, the one that's different - as it should be.

All this time he's been viewing the site with browser magnification on, as if he had a newspaper under a magnifying glass and is on the phone to the editor complaining about the dottiness of the image he sent in to them.
StrayCat e2
10 15.5k 2 Canada
31 Aug 2014 5:13AM
Disregard.
TanyaH e2
11 680 77 United Kingdom
31 Aug 2014 4:38PM
Although this discussion has now gone way above my head with the technicalities, one thing I did wonder is whether the portfolio setting of 'stretched' or 'centered' would have any bearing on how images display? It probably doesn't in itself, but may make a different given other factors and/or settings?
Chris_L e2
1.5k United Kingdom
6 Sep 2014 8:54PM
Nope Tongue
6 Sep 2014 9:27PM
Not sure if this is the correct place for this.

But, one of my images has been given a Guest Editor Award Grin
Probably nothing special to most people. But it is the first real recognition for an image I made so I am over the moon and very excited.
Also, it is thanks to the many hints and tips I have been given by people on here Smile

Here it is

http://www.ephotozine.com/user/crazycurtis28-258552/gallery/photo/street-jazz-40744862

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.