|
|
| David Gray 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
| underprocessable | |
| David Gray 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
|
.....here we go again...when I resized the image it said it was 250KB but when
posted it comes out at 386KB. I am having real touble making my KB number
small without making the photo too small. :)
David
"David Gray" <kadamar@zeuter.com> wrote in message news:44cbe6a2_1@cnews...
>
> I just got back from a holiday and have started playing with my images.
> This was done completely with PSP 10 using itsVitual Painter plugin.
>
> David
>
>
| |
| Joëlle 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
|
"David Gray" <kadamar@zeuter.com> wrote in message news:44cbe6a2_1@cnews...
>
> I just got back from a holiday and have started playing with my images.
> This was done completely with PSP 10 using itsVitual Painter plugin.
>
> David
>
>
Verrry nice David, excellent composition and I love the colours, they pop!
:-)
Joëlle
| |
| Joëlle 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
|
"David Gray" <kadamar@zeuter.com> wrote in message news:44cbe820_3@cnews...
>
> ....here we go again...when I resized the image it said it was 250KB but
> when posted it comes out at 386KB. I am having real touble making my KB
> number small without making the photo too small. :)
>
> David
> "David Gray" <kadamar@zeuter.com> wrote in message
> news:44cbe6a2_1@cnews...
>
>
>
Hehe, I *thought* it took a while to load..
Images with a lot of lines seem to be more bloated, I am sure someone will
have an explanation for that..
Nice image just the same :-)
Joëlle
| |
| Spandex Rutabaga 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
| David Gray wrote:
>
> ....here we go again...when I resized the image it said it was 250KB but when
> posted it comes out at 386KB. I am having real touble making my KB number
> small without making the photo too small. :)
The image gets uuencoded when it is attached to a post. This means
its representation uses only printable characters. Non-printing
ASCII characters (less than decimal 32) are disallowed and all
the characters use only the low 7 bits of each 8 bit byte. These
two things together mean that more bytes have to be sent and your
file size appears to grow.
What I don't understand is why you wanted to post a 250 KB image
in the first place. (After downloading your posted image to my
computer the file size was 293,629 bytes.) The attached image is
only 78,891 bytes or only 27% of the size of yours. More than 99.9%
of the color differences between my image and yours are 20 parts
in 256 or fewer. (Two thirds of the differences are 3 parts in 256
or fewer.) In other words, my image isn't significantly different
from yours except for being nearly a quarter of the size. I saved
it from the JPEG Optimizer using the attached settings. (Your
image contained EXIF information, which is pretty useless when
the image has been converted from a photo to something artsy.)
I can't imagine why you are having trouble making small files. It
is not as if the image were filled with incompressible fine texture.
Perhaps my settings will be of some use to you.
| |
| Adriaan Barel 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
|
"David Gray" <kadamar@zeuter.com> wrote in message news:44cbe6a2_1@cnews
> I just got back from a holiday and have started playing with my
> images. This was done completely with PSP 10 using itsVitual Painter
> plugin.
> David
Love the colours and the reflection in the water. This one is certainly a
wall hanger.
--
----oooOOOooo----
Adriaan Barel
| |
| David Gray 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
| underprocessable | |
| Adriaan Barel 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
|
"David Gray" <kadamar@zeuter.com> wrote in message news:44cbfd43_3@cnews[color=darkred]
> Thanks for the information Spandex. I have been resizing with the
> Faramir Stairway percent script. It always used to resise nicely with
> most posts under 200 KB. This one is the size you get when the stated
> size comes out at 164 KB...pretty tiny. Please excuse my ignorance on
> the subject, but where do I find the Jpeg optimizer you used......I
> can't seem to find it.
> David
> "Spandex Rutabaga" <SpRu@agabatur.xednaps> wrote in message
> news:44CBEEBA.67ACFF85@agabatur.xednaps...
It's under:- File > Export> JPEG Optimizer. Hope this helps.
----oooOOOooo----
Adriaan Barel
| |
| David Gray 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
|
Thanks Adriaan...
David
"Adriaan Barel" <apbarel@REMOVEbigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:44cc00c9_3@cnews...
>
> "David Gray" <kadamar@zeuter.com> wrote in message news:44cbfd43_3@cnews
>
> It's under:- File > Export> JPEG Optimizer. Hope this helps.
>
>
> ----oooOOOooo----
>
> Adriaan Barel
>
>
| |
| Barbara J Bradley 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
| underprocessable | |
|
|
"David Gray" <kadamar@zeuter.com> wrote in news:44cbfd43_3@cnews:
>
> Thanks for the information Spandex. I have been resizing with
the
> Faramir Stairway percent script. It always used to resise
nicely with
> most posts under 200 KB. This one is the size you get when the
stated
> size comes out at 164 KB...pretty tiny. Please excuse my
ignorance on
> the subject, but where do I find the Jpeg optimizer you
used......I
> can't seem to find it.
>
> David
[snipped]
Hi David,
There seems to be some mis-communication going on here.
When you use the Faramir Stairway script to resize an image what
you are doing is taking an image that is X number of pixels wide
and X number of pixels high and resizing it smaller so that there
are fewer pixels in the width and height of the image. I presume
that you are doing this so that the image will have a pixel
dimension that will show up on most computer screens without
requiring the viewer to scroll (i.e., it will fit comfortably on
the screen for viewing).
That is a good first step.
However, the file size of an image (the KB you refer to) is not
the pixel size I discussed in the first paragraph. If you save
your image as an uncompressed tif, for example, it will have a
much larger file size than if saved as a compressed pspimage file
or a compressed jpg. This is where the different Save options in
Paint Shop Pro (and other programs) come into play.
For web posting or emailing of photos (where you want the file
size to be reasonably small) you use the Jpg Optimizer. Go to
File>Export>Jpg Optimizer. (You'll see there is also a Gif
Optimizer and a PNG Optimizer for when those options are
appropriate).
The Jpg Optimizer opens a dialogue with your original image in
the left preview pane and the results of the compression level
you choose in the right pane. When saving as jpg., it compresses
the image (makes it smaller in file size, not pixel size, which
is the purpose of jpg) but in doing so it must delete information
from the image. At reasonably low compression levels the missing
information is not noticeable to people viewing the image as the
algorithm interpolates information from adjoining pixels and
makes for smooth transitions. The higher the compression level
(and therefore the smaller the file size), however, the "less
smooth" these transitions become, and artifacts and halo effects
become noticeable in the image.
When starting with a good quality image you can jpg optimize and
set a compression level as high as 30 and not usually see any
problem in the right preview window. If you shoved the
compression up to 90 you'd see a useless image.
Below that preview window you will see the file size of the image
at the compression you select. The idea is to watch the preview
as you increase compression until you see degradation, and back
off until things look good to get the minimum file size. You can
back off even further if you can live with a bigger file size.
Never save your originals or working copies as jpgs (other than
copying them from the camera if they come out as jpgs, as copying
is not the same as saving) because each jpg save degrades the
image to some extent. Always save in a lossless format.
Regards,
JoeB
| |
| Spandex Rutabaga 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
|
David Gray wrote:
>
> Thanks for the information Spandex. I have been resizing with the Faramir
> Stairway percent script. It always used to resise nicely with most posts
> under 200 KB. This one is the size you get when the stated size comes out at
> 164 KB...pretty tiny. Please excuse my ignorance on the subject, but where
> do I find the Jpeg optimizer you used......I can't seem to find it.
As others have pointed out, look for File > Export > JPEG Optimizer.
The file size of your image will depend on two things: (1) how much
you choose to compress the image (and the related issue of how
compressible is the image subject matter) and (2) the number of
pixels in your image. Generally speaking you would want to use a
compression value in the range 15 to 30, which avoids having too
many visible JPEG artifacts. Look at the file size you would get
at this compression and, if it is too large, cancel out of the
Optimizer, resize your image smaller so it has fewer pixels and
try saving again. Resizing an image smaller is quite effective
because, if you change each dimension by 80%, the number of pixels
in the image drops as the square of that, i.e. it becomes 64% of
the original in this example. So a little resizing can go a long
way if you choose your JPEG compression wisely.
If it doesn't have too much fine texture you should be able to get
an image of around 1000 x 800 pixels down to less than 150 KB. I
manage that routinely. (The image will, however, have to be resized
down to a smaller pixel size if there is a lot of texture such as
tree leaves if you want to hit the 150 KB target without excessive
artifacts.
You are probably also making your life too complicated by using
scripts to resize. A simple Image > Resize followed by an Unsharp
Mask at Radius/Strength/Clipping 1.0 to 2.0/30 to 50/5 is probably
no more than you need.
| |
| Lori Davis 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
| David Gray wrote:
> ....here we go again...when I resized the image it said it was 250KB but when
> posted it comes out at 386KB. I am having real touble making my KB number
> small without making the photo too small. :)
>
David, something else to do to reduce the size of images that started
out as photos is to not save the EXIF data. I snagged your image and
noticed that the EXIF data is present.
The attached screen shot of the JPEG Optimizer dialog shows the checkbox
you should uncheck.
Lori
| |
| David Gray 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
|
Thanks Lori....that's a great idea
David
"Lori Davis" <loriweb@REMOVEpair.com> wrote in message
news:44CD31C8.3040309@REMOVEpair.com...
> David Gray wrote:
>
> David, something else to do to reduce the size of images that started
> out as photos is to not save the EXIF data. I snagged your image and
> noticed that the EXIF data is present.
>
> The attached screen shot of the JPEG Optimizer dialog shows the checkbox
> you should uncheck.
>
> Lori
>
| |
| David Gray 2006-08-02, 12:09 pm |
|
Thank you all for your helpful suggestions.
David
"David Gray" <kadamar@zeuter.com> wrote in message news:44cbe6a2_1@cnews...
>
> I just got back from a holiday and have started playing with my images.
> This was done completely with PSP 10 using itsVitual Painter plugin.
>
> David
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Copyright 2003 - 2009 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |