AdaptedLenses wrote:
Geez, get a little busy at work and 35 pages have flown by. Got out a little around the 4th here but mostly snapshots of family. Couple car details from the parade with 100mm Series E. Fortunately the shiners didn’t crash this year.
Don't get too many from the 100E or 135E, but that's a sharp lens!
This is an old church in Monticello, GA that has fallen into ruin. The black vulture that you can see in the last photo just sat there and watched me the entire time I was there.
Leighton, for your reference, these were processed in On1 Photo Raw and linked from Flickr.
Concerning image quality. I have noticed that if any vertical image is more than 1000 pixels - it goes grainy. Those of you that use flickr as your image host - the image seems to be too large for the screen, and runs right past the scroll bar on the right. If I click the image it resizes it to fit the screen and puts it on a black background. The same thing happens with my own photos using flickr as the host. My own domain does not make any changes to the image. My resolution is 1920 x 1080, but it even happens on my high rez monitor at 3840 x 2160. So, I am not sure if it is the host, or FM.
leighton w wrote:
As the saying goes, "I don't want to whip a dead horse". But, is anyone else experiencing soft images when shared on this thread compared to what they see on their computer?
The reason I'm asking is that I have a theory that it may have something to do with the Xtrans sensor of my Fuji, but I'm not sure. Or...perhaps it may be sharing from Flickr. I'm bound to find out.
Scott, What a poignant commentary on the state of religion.
spoupard wrote:
This is an old church in Monticello, GA that has fallen into ruin. The black vulture that you can see in the last photo just sat there and watched me the entire time I was there.
Leighton, for your reference, these were processed in On1 Photo Raw and linked from Flickr.
Leighton,
The FM hosted image is 1200 x 800 pixels plus the exif/iptc data is preserved. The flickr hosted image is 1024 x 683, and all the metadata has been stripped.
leighton w wrote:
This time, from Flickr.
On Flickr, it's sharp as a tack. But not when it gets here. Click the Flickr link to see it for yourself. I give up!
Leighton, I am primarily an Lightroom Classic user, with a side trip to Photoshop as needed. I do have an old Nik Effects for B&W that I use occasionally as well. I have an old version of Luminar 4.0 that I did not like all that well (probably because I am used to lightroom), Nikon Capture if I want to see how Nikon software would process NEFs (very low use).
One more experiment to try re: sharpness, upload to flickr as whatever resolution you want to show in FM. So if you want to show as 1200x800, export from Luminar to a 1200x800 jpg, upload to flickr, then link here to FM. I have found that some photo hosting sites do not do well with resizing for display.
There are also some articles on compression used on web traffic that I have read in the past that can mess with image sharpness and resolution, and if my memory is correct, the compression artifacts are not always consistent, and I assume there are parameters that can change in the compression depending on server traffic and settings. Sometimes there is compression at the source, or maybe even compression on the "hops" as the data winds it's way from the host to our screens. That's my limited understanding of this frustrating issue.
When I go to this image in your Flickr it doesn't appear in full size when I click on it to expand it. On my 4k monitor it looks like clicking on the image limits it to 2048 pixels on the long edge.
However I can see different image size options, via the download icon, and can download the maxed sized image of 6048x4099. Looks fine and sharp to me.
What do you have set in your Flickr settings? Maybe the truncation is happening here?
I have:
Largest shared image size
Best display size
From the BBCode menu I usually select Large: 1600 pixel option for the URL to embed into FM.
EDIT: I should have said that I limit the size of the JPEGS output from LR to about 8Meg for a standard FX frame and scale accordingly for panos. I set resolution to 300 pixels per inch but do not resize to fit any image pixel width or length.
Just wanted to comment on your local treasure - a general store. In Northport Michigan there was an IGA (Independent Grocers Association or Alliance) that used a pot belly wood stove bolted to it's 2nd story corner for it's sign. It had nails, screws and bolts by the pound, lumber, furniture, groceries, housewares, meat and cheese, clothing, - it had everything. Two stories high with creaky wooden floors. The whole community seemed to hang out at the IGA. A grocery store right next door eventually bought them out and closed it down, and it's absence was huge. You are a lucky man.
leighton w wrote:
Here's our local general store, right done the hill from us. 55mm f2.8 ais.
Leighton, I did not comment on the issue you were seeing with the very first picture of the dealer as it seemed okay to me. However, the crates do show the difference, with the FM hosted picture being noticeably less sharp compared to the flickr image. The flickr image seems really sharp, but it seemed like you were observing the opposite?
spoupard wrote:
This is an old church in Monticello, GA that has fallen into ruin. The black vulture that you can see in the last photo just sat there and watched me the entire time I was there.
Leighton, for your reference, these were processed in On1 Photo Raw and linked from Flickr.
Maybe you're right. I downloaded some Nikon NEF files and I'm going to process them later today to see if I'm getting the same issues.
