Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/04/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I went through the problem of poor picture quality on some monitors = when we were setting up our web site at the newspaper I work at. = Here's some of what I learned. Most of the problems were traced to poor quality monitors, or poor = quality video being sent to PC monitors. Macintosh has better video = right out of the box =8B more colors (bit depth), more resolution, = etc. This is *not* to say that good quality video cannot be had on = PCs, just that many entry-level PCs do not have enough video-RAM, or = good video cards to deliver good video to their monitors. Also many = of the PC monitors were not of the best quality. This is changing, = especially with newer and more expensive PC systems. That being said, there are some things that can be done to assure = that quality is there (in the images) to begin with. Make sure your monitor is calibrated. Calibration of monitors to = output is a never-ending task and learning process. Be mighty = suspicious of so-called experts who claim to be able to calibrate all = your monitors. I've not seen it happen yet. Adobe Photoshop (for Mac, anyway) comes with a control panel named = "Gamma." It's in the Goodies: Calibration folder. Drag it to your = System folder, restart, and read the section in the Photoshop manual = about how to calibrate your monitor using the Gamma control panel. Although not perfectly precise, it works very well, and gives you a = starting point that assures some level of uniformity in your images' = color balance and density.If you have set it up properly, you can be = (almost) sure that any poor quality viewing experiences can be traced = to the user's monitor, and not to yours. Save your continuous tone images (photos) as JPEG for your Web = pages. JPEGs can look better than GIFs, which are limited to 256 = colors. JPEGs will be displayed at the user's monitor's bit depth, up = to 24-bit color (millions of colors), while GIFs are only displayed = at up to 8-bit color (256 colors). JPEG at "Medium" quality =8B this = give a small file size, with plenty of quality for viewing on a = monitor. GIFs tend to get loaded onto the page a bit faster even = though the JPEG'd image can be a smaller file size, but the time is = negligible. If you'd like to display a large, screen-filling image, consider = making it a link from a smaller version of the same image. Use Unsharp Mask to sharpen your online photos. I use 80%, Radius = 1.0, Threshold 0 for the photos on our site. They might even be able = to be sharpened further, but this works well for the size image we = use. Hope some of this helps. I am not a Web, or a computer expert, just = a photographer who had to (and wanted to) learn a little about both. = There is a link to the newspaper's site from my Web page. - -Jack Milton =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D Many hands make light work. Too many cooks spoil the broth. I'm = confused. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D <http://www.agate.net/~jmilton/index.html>