I am new to your forum and would like suggestions on how best to downscale my photos to fit within the 500Kb limitation, but come in as large as possible.
I shoot RAW and use Canon's DPP software to tweak my images and Canon's Zoom Browser to crop and resize them to 800x???. This brings the file size to around 250Kb, which is fine, but I wonder if someone here has a technique for doing this that is more work efficient.
Also, as an aside, the trimming function in DPP is greyed out and I can't figure out why and get that functionality back! Any thoughts from those of you who may use that software?
Thanks,
Phil
Phil, upload full res photos to your flickr and copy the BB code to here. Can't help you with DPP i use Lightroom.
Shorty......Canon gear
Canberra
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rawshorty/
This is a test to see if the linkage to flickr is working for me....
<a href="https://www.birdsinbackyards.net/%3Ca%20href%3D"http://www.flickr.com/photos/colleen_and_phil/9361785318/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/colleen_and_phil/9361785318/" title="Stellar Jay Eye by Colleen and Phil, on Flickr"><img src="https://www.birdsinbackyards.net/%3Ca%20href%3D"http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3690/9361785318_d1f81cb9d3_c.jpg">http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3690/9361785318_d1f81cb9d3_c.jpg" width="800" height="602" alt="Stellar Jay Eye"></a>
Nope... dang!
Shorty, can you help me link to my files on flickr? I copied and pasted the link flickr provided, but got what you see above... HTML stuff.
Phil
Trying again... I think I see where I went wrong...
Stellar Jay Eye by Colleen and Phil, on Flickr
Thanks for the help, Shorty! Got it going on, now... SO much easier!
Now, if I could just send RAW to flickr........ not likely! :?o
Phil
Was just about to help but i see you worked it out. Very nice shot of the Jay. No compresion loss coming from flickr helps heaps.
Shorty......Canon gear
Canberra
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rawshorty/
I use Photoscape to convert RAW to JPG, http://www.photoscape.org/ps/main/index.php
Thanks for the tip, Nathan... I will check out Photoscape.
BTW, I really like your work, Nathan. You folks here have really "thrown down the gauntlet" for me... LOL! I have to work harder.
Best Wishes,
Phil
"Now, if I could just send RAW to flickr........ not likely! :?o"
What would be the point of that ? Surley the wholr idea of shotting RAW is so you can tweak the hell out of it in your editor of choice using a bigger screen, more advanced software and more powerful CPU on your computer, rather then the computer in your camera..
If all you want an easier workflow thsn that, tweak the cameras settings to produce the best JPG it can and then upload straight to Flickr.
Hello bh,
I will take your comment,
"Surley the wholr idea of shotting RAW is so you can tweak the hell out of it in your editor of choice..."
to mean that you find my photographs "tweak"ed to "hell"!
My mother taught me that when I had nothing nice to say, say nothing at all...
Well put greviousbh, I'm with you on that one. There is no greater challenge than to get a good photo out of the camera.
Patrik
I think I get where you're coming from Phil. For one, RAW to flickr would mean an instant external backup for your RAW file, plus one less process into a lossy (detail decreasing) format like JPG - well that's what would appeal to me anyway. I'd need one heck of a faster connection though for uploading
.
Surely you jest greviousbh?
The main point of shooting RAW for most people I know, is so you get the best picture you can at the time with your camera, by telling your camera to capture all the detail it can at that specific moment. Take a shot in RAW, your camera records all the information captured by the sensors, so higher quality images. Shoot in JPEG, information is compressed and lost forever. Why? Because even if you have your camera set to record every shot in JPEG, it still (technically) captures it in RAW, processes the photo internally (tweaks it for you) and then chooses what part of the image to discard before converting it (compressing it) to JPEG on your camera. So, shooting in JPEG doesn't mean someone is a better photographer because they don't post process, or tweak, because their camera is doing all the tweaking for them anyway, even if they don't know it. Cameras don't always get it right either.
West Coast Tasmania
Hi RubyE,
You've hit upon part of my reasoning for making the comment about uploading RAW files to the internet.
I have uploaded images to Facebook for years, to entertain family and friends with birds and animals, BUT have been really unhappy with the way my shots get "ruined" through the compression algorythmns they employ to save storage space! I don't blame them, but it does soften images.
I do admit that I "tweak" my images, more due to exposure mistakes/circumstances and issues of contrast than other attributes. I can also think of times when all I could manage to do, to get that "catch" of a fleating image, was to press the shutter release and pray I get something I can "resurect" in post processing.
Sometimes, when an image is just a smidge out of focus but it's the best of the lot, I don't want to see it softened more while making the trip up to the internet!
If I shoot in JPG at all, it's in tandem with RAW... takes more time to send to memory, but that's a tradeoff against the ease of uploading to FB or email; usually a family affair or trips with friends... Now, I upload to Flickr through DXO, as it's built into the program, as an option, and use Flickr to show here. Beats having to handle that by hand.
In my view it’s a sad fact , that photography today reflects our demands and the idea that everything has to be perfect. There is no doubt all cameras these days , even the smallest point&shoot camera, is so highly developed and filled with sophisticated technology, even the non-professional photographer can achieve great results. How boring and uninspiring is that? Many years ago this was always a point of discussion I had with my students. Anything perfect leaves nothing to the imagination.
If you take the not-so-perfect photos, your eyes and your brain will work out what the rest might look like. The beauty of that also is, everyone will have a different image in their mind. I could go on and on about how your brain converts a flat surface into a round object because you know what it looks like in reality. But I’m not going to turn this into one of my lectures, I’m enjoying my retirement too much. I love the not- so- perfect in life (and photography in general) much more.
Sorry if this is a more philosphical point of view, the photographers striving for perfection don't want to discuss.
Patrik
Hi Patrik,
I am happy to discuss philsophical points of view! :2)
But, and maybe I missed something here, your first post
"There is no greater challenge than to get a good photo out of the camera."
seems to suggest that one finds great joy in getting a "good" photograph, while your later post seems to suggest that we should not worry so much and be happy with whatever results we achieve. I am not the sharpest lens in the kit (pun intended), but I strive for the best image I can get... therefore my distaste with Facebook's handling of my images (JPG to upload and then squished even further on FB's end!) fits right into the "no greater challenge.." mindset. I wish they would meddle less stridently with my images!
I have been shooting pictures, selling photo gear, and or working in a photo lab for more than 30 years, so my thoughts have had time to jell a bit. I don't know if that is good or bad, but life is what it is. I enjoy the hobby and the chase that wild life offers is a refreshing change.
Thanks for the comments, and I would enjoy see some of your work... I can't seem to search by your name, would you send me a link?
Phil
I agree Phil. Most of my family live interstate, which means we don't always get together as often as we would like. I find the same frustration sometimes uploading (to FB for example) because I prefer my photos to show what I've taken & what I see in my original RAW shot, which to me represents a snapshot of a moment through my eyes.
If you shoot in RAW, sharpening (for example, for the web) is generally needed anyway, if not for any other reason than to offset the loss of detail when you convert to JPEG. Take a shot in RAW and it captures between 4096-16384 levels of brightness - levels of brightness in this case being the "bits" or number of steps to black & white in a shot, the smoothness if you like. Take a shot in JPEG & that records around only 256 levels. BIG difference & drop in detail. Not entirely sure what the RAW to JPEG loss is when done on a PC, but would be surprised if it wasn't the same.
Why would it matter that "even the non-professional photographer can achieve great results"? That's liberating in my book, to have advancements in technology which enables anyone to now feel confident to have a go at capturing the world around them, not boring or uninspiring.
Anyway Phil, I think your original question of resizing workflow was answered long ago by Shorty - so this has probably gone quite off topic now - I'll take some of the blame for that
. Perhaps a new thread would be pertininent for further discussion for those wishing to do so.
West Coast Tasmania
O no, Phil.
Sorry to say ,you completely missed my point. I was trying to highlight the effect perfection in photography has. To confuse you even more , the correlation between Photography-Art-Imagination, and how the most sophisticated technology does not necessarily achieve the best result. (Just a little joke, if technology can remove you mother’s wrinkles and double chin , she might love you for it…..but as far as photography goes….?)
Are you telling me you have tried to find out about my name? You want to see my work? Not going to happen. (almost sounds as if I’m not good at it?)
I’m very happy to admit, I’m not an expert in anything, still learning about life and people every day. Like right now. Might go back to University as a student this time, yes I’m a bit old, but one can never have too many degrees.
Don’t let my comments upset you too much, will only make you even more aggressive.
Patrik
Just a reminder to everyone to please remember the forum rules and be respectful and nice to each other. Debate of course but don't niggle and bait each other.
Messages have the potential to be misinterpreted and tone not conveyed properly online so please remember that when you post.
Time to get back on topic please
thanks
Holly
"There is no greater challenge than to get a good photo out of the camera"
".....even the smallest point&shoot camera, is so highly developed and filled with sophisticated technology, even the non-professional photographer can achieve great results"
"...the correlation between Photography-Art-Imagination, and how the most sophisticated technology does not necessarily achieve the best result."
Confusing contradictions thick_knee. My brain feels like it's just been compressed from RAW into a JPEG after trying to go back & make sense of all that again
.
"Don’t let my comments upset you too much, will only make you even more aggressive." Nope, hard-pressed to find any aggression in Phil's posts. I can't imagine a tone or even emoticon available which would make that comment anything but what it comes across as, rude & unpleasant. Perhaps a revisit to the forum rules - points 1 & 2 in particular - would be a start.
http://www.birdsinbackyards.net/forum/Forum-Rules-please-read-posting-0
West Coast Tasmania
Hi Patrik, Ruby, and Holly,
Please excuse me if my comments have been inflamatory or inappropriate! I have no interest in sewing seeds of discontent or displaying any other than a positive attitude!
I will admit that FB does irk me though :) in it's handling of images.
Holly, would you kindly either delete this thread, or at least "kill" for me (I hope that since I created it, I should be able to call for its demise)?
Gratefully, and sincerely yours all,
Phil
Locking this thread now