Travel Photography group posting on GLOBOsapiens

Scanning & Uploading Pictures

Postings 1 - 4 of 4

rangutan Premium account Joined: Aug 04 Points: 34752 Posts: 1044 Posted: 2004-11-06 22:37:00    Its one thing taking brilliant pictures when travelling, what counts is the quality presented online. Members please help here, im not an expert, just do this as a hobby. We need some basic helpfull rules, tricks and tips. Rules: 1) Upload max is 500kB, best round 150 KB and only in jpg or gif formats 2) the eventual view size is automatically reduced by GLOBO software to an optimal size 3) its better to upload a higher pixel quality and size as reasonable, picture reducing enhances quality, enlarging a picture after saving reduces quality 4) (new) minimum width of an uploaded picture must be 600 pixels My current scanner is a HP-Officejet-1170c, there are better new ones out there now, but see the differences between 100 & 300dpi scanning and presentation options just from the scanner settings and using a picture enhancer program: http://www.globosapiens.net/rangutan/picture-st.-bartholoma-100dpi-raw-14299.html http://www.globosapiens.net/rangutan/picture-st.-bartholoma-300dpi-raw-14298.html http://www.globosapiens.net/rangutan/picture-st.-bartholoma-300dpi-best-14297.html Example: Scanning (say a 6x4inch print) at 300dpi takes a bit longer but gives a much clearer picture. resulting size (1800x1200 pixels) might sound huge but its ideal for removing dust and scratch marks, even unwanted people! That size makes the now digital picture also ready for any other future use like DVD presentations on a large TV. My computer slide-show program reduces the display size automatically for optimal viewing. JPG Format: a brilliant invention, now world standard for picture data - reduces the size of a file by 10 to 20 times that of BMP Format with hardly loss in quality. Data size: When saving the scan as jpg format, I use a 40 percent compression grade. This reduce the size of the file, not picture size and not much the quality, from (eg) 614kB to 165kB. Larger files are only needed if you want to print posters! Also, ive learned to use a black/dark card above the print to omit blue/haze light in the scan. Still cannt figure out why the sky does such crazy things by scanning! Thanks to Martin for bringing this topic to our attention at: (see also) http://www.globosapiens.net/topic-picture-size_37_1238_0000.html [ This Message was edited by: rangutan on 2004-12-21 15:27 ] --- Rudolf "Rangutan" Graspointner Reply    Reply with quote    Contact rangutan   ravinderkumarsi Premium account Joined: Aug 04 Points: 14003 Posts: 451 Posted: 2004-11-07 06:46:00    yes rangutan, i saw all the three pictures and there is a big difference ,the one with "PhotoTech: OlympusNu Fuji200 film, print 6x4, scan HP1170c 300dpi, 1950x1299 pixels, 15% lighter, 20% contrast, wash sky, bottom chop, 134KB " is excellent . hope this will help for ppl like me who are not frequent user of scanner . ravi --- at bangalore /back 2 globo after a long Reply    Reply with quote    Contact ravinderkumarsi   rangutan Premium account Joined: Aug 04 Points: 34752 Posts: 1044 Posted: 2004-11-09 17:45:00    Beautiful picture but scanning or scanner problems - scanned in fast or in preview-mode or at low pixel quality: http://www.globosapiens.net/bootlegga/picture-typhoon-season-14392.html --- Rudolf "Rangutan" Graspointner Reply    Reply with quote    Contact rangutan   lukasdj Premium account Joined: Jun 03 Points: 1117 Posts: 23 Posted: 2005-07-05 15:06:00    Hi everybody, I have seen the last picture selected by Rudi and it seems to be a heating problem of the scanner. When I start my scanner (I have a old one), I have to make three or four scans in order to obtain pictures without that problem or also some other color problems like half picture with a red or blue dominant. The first pictures selected by Rudi say that even if the source isn't perfect, with some post-processing you can achieve a very good result. I usually start from a BMP 600dpi scan because I use it as an original start picture for different purposes: original high-quality repository (I have lots of dvds...), glossy print, extract zooms, create special effects with details from different pictures. If I scan with less quality or different format (any lossless format like jpg) I would be very limited in post-processing. Then I resize and/or convert from this original scan depending on which media I use (PC, TV, paper). During post-processing I usually soften background scene like sky and clouds and sharpen details like people or buildings, it's a hard and time spending job finding the right level of filter to apply! For Globo pictures first I resize to 600px width and then convert to jpg with maximum quality. I prefer to resize first because it seems to me that bicubic algorithm used to resize image (almost all graphical application use this algorithm) is better the jpg compression algorithm. I don't upload jpg picture bigger than 600px because I want to minimize the conversion step of Globo application (each conversion loses information and quality). At least, you have to consider also your viewer: if your browser hasn't a good viewer plugin for your picture format (for instance jpg) you will see a bad picture even if your source is perfect. Another - different - example is your TV set: beautiful pictures on PC become bad on TV. It happens because your are using a different (hardware) viewer: in this case a different hardware implementation (interlaced system for you TV) make your picture tiny details flickering! This is my greatest problem to resolve now... Luca:) Reply    Reply with quote    Contact lukasdj