Saturday, August 22, 2009

Camera Stuff



full resolution
168/365
Yes, two photos of the same thing. I'll explain in a moment. I have several items I'd like to address today...

First: I had an opportunity today to go check out a camera that I have been considering acquiring... so, I took my lenses & we went to the camera store. We all hit it off really well. One of the many features I liked was the in camera image stabilization -- this photo was shot hand-held, at 1/13 of a second. Maybe the sharpness is hard to appreciate through the glass doors, but I couldn't get away with that using the camera I have now...

Second: Two photos. Can you tell the difference? The top image is hosted by Blogger, and the bottom is hosted on our own server. Blogger will always compress the images uploaded to it... We don't have to compress the images on our server, but -- as you may have noticed, a 10mb file can slow things down. (Thus ends my "technical" knowledge of what's at play here. I just know I like the bottom photo better.) Does anyone out there have any wisdom to share on this issue? Is there any way to preserve image quality without having to display such a huge file?

Third: That's film. For cameras. Remember film?



6 comments:

Scraps said...

I don't have any technical knowledge to share with you, however looking at this posting on my computer screen (after waiting several minutes for the second photo to load), the first photo is quite a bit clearer. The second one is actually grainy.

Nora said...

I think the color is better on the second one but YES it does take a crazy long time to load. Like back from the days from 33K modems.

Attie's Mom said...

my comment is that I like the color of the top shelf blue film and purple film better. Don't know which was more accurate.
Also I don't see much fuzziness difference.
The bottom one took a wicked long time to load.

The Management said...

Thanks for the feedback.

Of course, the other complicating factor is that we are all using different monitors, which can affect how an image looks... To me, the colors in the second one are more accurate. As for grain, I was shooting at ISO 800, so that's at least consistent with what you'd expect from the image... even though it's maybe not always desirable.

But, I agree that crazy, wicked long load times are a huge drag. I'll try not to do that anymore. ;)

Lindsey Buchleitner Photography said...

If you were making a print then these subtle differences would really be BIG differences.

When it comes to displaying images on the the web, you are right - we all have different monitors. So it's really not worth obsessing over such subtle differences as these. It's much more important to get your photos to load so that you don't loose your viewers before the image comes up. Web viewers are very impatient by nature these days. We are so spoiled by the speed we have become accustomed to. So grab us while you can, go for the smaller faster file and save your obsessing for when you are making prints. Then...let the obsessing begin!

LOVE the blog!

The Management said...

Thanks for your input, Lindsey! All good points.

Now I feel free to move onto another obsession...