Toni's Dragon Emperor

Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....
This is somewhat of a testing thread and mostly discovery so ...

After much testing and some learning on my part I have made a few discoveries. I am essentially testing a few theories that I have.

attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5898.jpg
    IMG_5898.jpg
    29.1 KB · Views: 1,005
  • IMG_5924.jpg
    IMG_5924.jpg
    40.7 KB · Views: 1,035
  • IMG_5935.jpg
    IMG_5935.jpg
    57 KB · Views: 1,038
  • IMG_5930.jpg
    IMG_5930.jpg
    53.7 KB · Views: 1,034
  • IMG_5908.jpg
    IMG_5908.jpg
    39.9 KB · Views: 1,036
Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....
From the original images there is serious color compression, loss of detail, less colors and flat.

The original image has a 3D effect to every one of them, not here. :( I am betting it is the photo setting the site is using.

If you pull this image up and compare it to the one on IAP you will see the differences.
 

randyrls

Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
4,821
Location
Harrisburg, PA 17112
Ed; A JPG file is a compressed file. Every time it is edited and saved whether by image editing software (you) or a system that processed the image, detail is lost. Kind of like making a copy, of a copy, of a copy, etc. Eventually it shows up in loss of detail, blurry lines, jaggies, and other "artifacts". If you want a pristine photo, use TIF, or other loss-less image format. Keep the original and any high quality photos in a format that doesn't compress the image on save. PNG is a good image format for the web but you will have to check to see if the photo system keeps it in that format.
 

brownsfn2

Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2011
Messages
1,574
Location
Plain City, OH
I think if you do the photos as attachments it will work better. As Randy said it is a compression issue. Detail is lost and I think that the compression setting on the site can be different from the photo editing software you might be using. Also it would be different than Facebook as well.

This pen still wows me when I see it. :)
 

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....
This is attached via png.
attachment.php


This is the earlier attachment I did from post #1
100708d1377760748-tonis-dragon-emperor-img_5935.jpg


This is an offsite hosting from facebook.
1011444_10200511905462041_1835208389_n.jpg


This is my personal image gallery hosting. I run the site and have full control over everything.
IMG_5935.JPG


Notice how the lower barrel is sharp, in focus and the detail on the highlights on my site and facebook image yet on the top 2, hosted here on IAP, that image section is not even in focus.

The site converts to jpg and even more data is lost than before. The problem I think is not that the file is a jpg but the image quality is not set to 100% on uploads. They appear to be closer to 60-70% image quality. Yes these images are set at attachments.

The epic frustration is when you spend hours coming up with a layout, comp and format to get some really good 3D effects only to have a hefty chunk discarded, the tragedy is many will not see the detail that has been lost.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5935.jpg
    IMG_5935.jpg
    63.2 KB · Views: 861

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....
The discoveries that I mentioned in post #1 is new methods of getting photo's that shows some astounding level of details. There are a great number of details that I see in objects that are not being picked up in images and I have found a few methods to capture some of those.
 

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....
Does it look different if I upload to IAP as an attachment? Here is the thumb below. You need to click on it to open fully.

View attachment 100721

Yes.

The sparkle highlights in both blanks is missing. there is a color shift. there is more zone 1 and zone 2 in the clip reflection, the perl texture is missing in both blanks. Also the image is flat and has lost most of the 3D effects.
 

brownsfn2

Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2011
Messages
1,574
Location
Plain City, OH
I thought that uploading it as an attachment would look different but maybe not. I will need to pay attention to my photos more. I did not notice the difference.

Of course the storage resources of the IAP are vastly different than that of Facebook or third-party image hosters. Also there are limits and charges for extra bandwidth. I am sure if there are compression settings on the photos that they are there in an attempt to save resources and make the site affordable to run. I don't think that is a bad thing. I mean this is a user supported site after all. ;)

If I was using this site to sell pens I might be more concerned.

Interesting to see though. Thanks for sharing.
 

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....
Limits are indeed fine, bandwidth, viewing size etc. can all be set and changed as needed. Some sites I post on has a small size, a medium size and a large size depending on the end users monitor setting. The images gets resized accordingly but you can still view the original size if you wanted. I am also not opposed to doing the classified type setup for me to post images here either. I first noticed there was something odd going on when I started on this project about a year or so ago but was not quite able to put my finger on it. I also realize there is a huge difference in compression settings and image quality.

On this set I was up till 4-5am making them :)
 

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....
OK Ed, you reported this post and asked for my comments. What exactly would you like to know?

Few post back I mentioned some problems with details being lost etc. I am not sure what I am doing wrong or if it is a site setting. Also can you tell us what the image quality and all of that is set to, if possible that is.

I am not trying to cause trouble or make waves or anything like that.

Also would it be better if I were to start doing some type of classified type arrangement on post I make like this?
 

jeff

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
8,970
Location
Westlake, OH, USA.
OK Ed, you reported this post and asked for my comments. What exactly would you like to know?

Few post back I mentioned some problems with details being lost etc. I am not sure what I am doing wrong or if it is a site setting. Also can you tell us what the image quality and all of that is set to, if possible that is.

I am not trying to cause trouble or make waves or anything like that.

Also would it be better if I were to start doing some type of classified type arrangement on post I make like this?

Image quality is a complex topic as you know. It has dependencies in browser type and configuration, CSS, and the backend toolkit (we use GD as it's bundled with PHP, but ImageMagick is a viable alternative some people prefer)

I know know offhand what the compression is set at in GD. About the only experiment I could offer would be to turn off image resize and let you try it.

Don't know what you mean by "classified type arrangement"
 

jeff

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
8,970
Location
Westlake, OH, USA.
I temporarily turned off image resizing if you want to play with that. The images should be stored just as you upload them, provided they are within the size limits and the filesize limits.
 

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....
Try this.

IAP attachment
attachment.php


This is via my gallery
IMG_5947.jpg



same image via facebook.
1229926_10200515438830373_1070465935_n.jpg


I see a color shift for starters. In every image there is major detail missing. We had to remove detail to comply with the file size constraints. the size limit allows approx 60% image quality retention.

for example. How much sparkle do you see in the image? Very little.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5947.jpg
    IMG_5947.jpg
    232 KB · Views: 390

jeff

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
8,970
Location
Westlake, OH, USA.
OK, Ed. Just because I'm a good sport, I've temporarily raised the file size to 1 meg and increased the maximum dimensions to 960px in both directions.

EDIT: However, I have to say that I can't see any difference between those photos. Perhaps I don't know where/how to look, or I need glasses or a better monitor.
 
Last edited:

Dan Masshardt

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2013
Messages
4,806
Location
Mechanicsburg, PA
I was wondering why your pens always have so many flaws. KIDDING!!!


I wouldn't have noticed the issues with the picture hosting, but your black circles in the first post do point them out well.

At the end of the day, It seems to me (read: personal opinion!) that to for the purposes of of sharing our pen designs with each other - not potential customers - it doesn't matter very much.

Your pens look great. Your photos are excellent - even with the flaws that show up in the transfer, they are better than many others posted her including all of mine.

If there would be a simple change to make that would remedy the 'problem' it would make sense to do it, but...
 

Smitty37

Passed Away Mar 29, 2018
In Memoriam
Joined
Nov 23, 2009
Messages
12,823
Location
Milford, Delaware 19963
Are you kidding???????????

A better blank, I would like to see you make a better blank than that.
Well Toni, I can't make a better blank than that ---- but you sure can. I've looked at a lot of your blanks - which are all fantastic - but I liked many of them more than this one.
 

Lenny

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2009
Messages
3,475
Location
Searsport, Maine
First of all, that's a very nice pen! :)

As far as scrutinizing the subtle differences between the photos goes, I'm afraid you are beating your head against the wall. Unless everyone who uses the Internet starts routinely calibrating their monitors with a device like Spyder, there will always be differences in any given image from monitor to monitor.
 

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....
I was wondering why your pens always have so many flaws. KIDDING!!!


I wouldn't have noticed the issues with the picture hosting, but your black circles in the first post do point them out well.

At the end of the day, It seems to me (read: personal opinion!) that to for the purposes of of sharing our pen designs with each other - not potential customers - it doesn't matter very much.

Your pens look great. Your photos are excellent - even with the flaws that show up in the transfer, they are better than many others posted her including all of mine.

If there would be a simple change to make that would remedy the 'problem' it would make sense to do it, but...

One of the reasons that I do like to post is to help inspire others to do better quality work. We all see and share stories of low quality things all day and it seems to be more of the norm than not and I hope that they do things like that.

As for flaws, everything has flaws. Personally I like to show them as that is one of the ways to inspire better work, more solutions and new techniques.

In the grand scheme of things for the most part it really does not matter much. However some areas, i.e. product compare, blanks, methods, results and the like is where things really pick up greatly.

OK, Ed. Just because I'm a good sport, I've temporarily raised the file size to 1 meg and increased the maximum dimensions to 960px in both directions.

EDIT: However, I have to say that I can't see any difference between those photos. Perhaps I don't know where/how to look, or I need glasses or a better monitor.

That to is what the big topic is with me. The #1 thing that everyone has said they have to zoom in some to see the image better so instead of say 800x600 perhaps 1024x768 maybe or something like that perhaps. The 1 meg is likely to large. The largest I can come up with at 960x is bit shy of 500k

Some of the details are lost if you will be I think that is more from the size. The reason many sites have lower resolutions, file size limits and the like is to keep the server from being junked up with junk.

This is what I was initially thing of may be some type of subscription service like the classified section is setup, $x per post or something like that. That would help with storage/bandwidth and what not. After all photo's like this does have serious marketing potential with it.


What we did:
I took the master image in RAW format at 240 PPI (pixels per inch)
Then I did my tweaking of whatever; in my case we did clarity and contrast, some ever so slight level adjustments, EXIF info like copyright information, author, remove some dust and spots in the background areas.
Then since the original was in 240 PPI resize the image to 800, then export to web and tinker with things until the size criteria was met.


---
These shots are 960x and under 1 meg each. They are also done in jpg mode and not raw mode.
attachment.php


attachment.php



As for the 'better blanks' goes. I would have to say proof is in the pudding. Show me, lead by example. Point me in the direction as I am starving for eye candy and am always looking for things to put under my camera lens.
 

Attachments

  • test1 - IMG_5562.jpg
    test1 - IMG_5562.jpg
    510 KB · Views: 323
  • test1-IMG_5608.jpg
    test1-IMG_5608.jpg
    284.7 KB · Views: 317

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....

Ed - did you turn those beads?

No I did not. Toni made those some time ago and I am not sure how they were done.

The smaller ones are color changing. Meaning a bright white light tent with a 500 w/s monolight going off they look light in color.

Here is how they look next to buffalo skin.
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5957.jpg
    IMG_5957.jpg
    846.1 KB · Views: 292

jyreene

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
1,476
Location
Overseas location
Ed - Post #24 with all the photos from different sites does show a difference. It took me about 30 minutes of starring at all of them to find them. With that said would it really matter that much unless you were really trying to show something special? I could see if you wanted to show something special or get help with something specific but those would be special cases. As for sales, I do agree the best photo should be the one presented to really show off the work. However, what I have done (when asked for better photos) is send the customer a better photo if requested. It's usually the original that I took without site limitations (not talking about here but the site I use in general).

Toni - Awesome blank. Seeing yours has gotten me trying PC...It's fun but man there is a lot to learn! I'll show my results in a separate thread (well my PITH partner will).

Also I really think we need an internationally recognized sarcasm font! Or this:
8 New and Necessary Punctuation Marks - CollegeHumor Article
 

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....
So, Ed, is the server still altering the photos? Wasn't that the issue?

Honestly I do still see some things changing still but not as bad as before. I have been testing various images to see what it is and so far it appears not to be the upload but the displaying in the threads. If you open the attachment by itself the size is different and with out the colorshift. It might be on my account/browser and am going to try it with various monitors and see what they show.

The changes made has been a big improvement and for that I do appreciate it and thank you.
 

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....
Ed - Post #24 with all the photos from different sites does show a difference. It took me about 30 minutes of starring at all of them to find them. With that said would it really matter that much unless you were really trying to show something special? I could see if you wanted to show something special or get help with something specific but those would be special cases. As for sales, I do agree the best photo should be the one presented to really show off the work. However, what I have done (when asked for better photos) is send the customer a better photo if requested. It's usually the original that I took without site limitations (not talking about here but the site I use in general).

Toni - Awesome blank. Seeing yours has gotten me trying PC...It's fun but man there is a lot to learn! I'll show my results in a separate thread (well my PITH partner will).

Also I really think we need an internationally recognized sarcasm font! Or this:
8 New and Necessary Punctuation Marks - CollegeHumor Article


30 minutes? I have for the most part been working to capture many aspects of pens that I see. I have been able to capture a good deal more with the new format that I have been working with and very good coverage of what I see before/when I take the shots.

It is like taking a pen and you see certain aspects on it like highlights, glitter, shimmering colors and the like. Holding the pen they stand out easily but capturing that on image is a whole new game.
 

jyreene

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
1,476
Location
Overseas location
30 minutes? I have for the most part been working to capture many aspects of pens that I see. I have been able to capture a good deal more with the new format that I have been working with and very good coverage of what I see before/when I take the shots.

It is like taking a pen and you see certain aspects on it like highlights, glitter, shimmering colors and the like. Holding the pen they stand out easily but capturing that on image is a whole new game.

I can be slow. It finally hit when I reread the entire thread. Color. I was looking for digital remnants or noise and finally saw the color difference. I'm still new to a lot of aspects of photography but I did finally see that one! So yes 30 minutes. Artistic things take me a long time to get.

In person I bet there is a world of difference and wish I could hold it to compare but I do understand the difference even with my own pens.

Thanks for showing this stuff Ed.
 

edstreet

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2007
Messages
3,684
Location
No longer confused....
30 minutes? I have for the most part been working to capture many aspects of pens that I see. I have been able to capture a good deal more with the new format that I have been working with and very good coverage of what I see before/when I take the shots.

It is like taking a pen and you see certain aspects on it like highlights, glitter, shimmering colors and the like. Holding the pen they stand out easily but capturing that on image is a whole new game.

I can be slow. It finally hit when I reread the entire thread. Color. I was looking for digital remnants or noise and finally saw the color difference. I'm still new to a lot of aspects of photography but I did finally see that one! So yes 30 minutes. Artistic things take me a long time to get.

In person I bet there is a world of difference and wish I could hold it to compare but I do understand the difference even with my own pens.

Thanks for showing this stuff Ed.

Color is one part but also digital remnants as well. One big area was every bit of the glitter was gone.
 
Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad
Top Bottom