Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/10/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I used to use 750 pixels on the horizontal side, but got some comments that the image would not fit on a single screen. I debated having medium (600) and large (750) images available, but finally just went with 600. I think FOM goes with 600. Jeffery At 06:20 AM 10/27/2002 +0100, you wrote: >Tim, > >I do not consider myself an expert on these matters, but I think my method >makes sense. I always scan at the scanner's maximum resolution, i.e. 2400 >ppi. This means that a full-frame 35mm image is about 3600x2400 pixels. >After I have made the levels and sharpness and whatever other adjustments >in Photoshop, I reduce the image to 750 pixels in width (if I have not >cropped anything, then the height will fall around 500 pixels) for a >horizontal image or 600 pixels in height for a vertical image so as to fit >it on most people's monitors. I do this using Photoshop's Image Size >command with the "Resample Image" box checked. I then save the result as >the JPG file that gets uploaded to my web site. They key is that the >initial scan and all subsequent Photoshop work is carried out at the >highest resolution; the reduction to web size comes only after all that >has been done. > >Nathan > >Tim Atherton wrote: > >>Other experts out there - what the best way to get an image that looks >>really nice on a web page, and doesn't start to get artefacts when it's been >>downsized? > >-- >Nathan Wajsman >Herrliberg (ZH), Switzerland > >e-mail: wajsman@webshuttle.ch >mobile: +41 78 732 1430 > >Photo-A-Week: http://www.wajsman.com/indexpaw2002.htm >General photo site: http://www.wajsman.com/index.htm > >-- >To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html