Resizing for the web

[tonygamble]

My last three web folders have been much sharper now i am using PWP.

Even sharper when I stop JuiceboxBuilder resizing them itself.

However, I am now worried they will be cumbersome for some folk, with slower broadband than mine, to view.

Thur 4.jpg (142.27 KiB) Viewed 817 times

I want to keep a decent set of files for printing. Presumably running the Resize transformation as a batch over the finished jpgs would be a good move.

What default setting would you recommend?

[tomczak]

I think that screens today are mostly full HD (1920×1080 px) or lower. It may make sense to downsample images to this or lower pixel dimensions (and possibly sharpen them at this size in the end) for online publishing.

p.s. There is a, usually subtle, decision to make if you produce two outputs of different sizes - when to split the flow? Normally, I use two Export/resampling points in the end (as opposed to producing e.g. the higher resolution sharpened output for printing, and then down-sampling this again for the web).

[tonygamble]

Following your PS approach I create a split with one Export producing a high res jpg as I do now.

I use the split for another Export saving an Output Image with 1920 on the long side. I then Export that to another folder with the low res jpgs for the web?

Would you add another sharpening stage for that newly created split between creating the 1920 image and Exporting it?

[tomczak]

The Export already has sharpening options, which may be all you need. For even more control, one can turn off the Export's sharpen and sharpen it 'manually' as a step beforehand. At each resolution there is probably a visual benefit if it is slightly sharpened before saving, trying not to overdo it.

[jsachs]

Typical recommended web portfolio resolutions are 2000-3000 pixels on the long side -- a lot of users have 4K monitors these days.

You can also experiment with reducing the JPEG quality setting.

[tonygamble]

Thanks for the tips.

I feel my best way forward is to shoot a test target using a tripod. Then I can try assorted permutations based on the suggested 4,000 long side and assorted levels of compression and sharpening within the Export transformation.

I'll leave those huge files on my website for the moment and see if anyone grumbles. My broadband handles them easily but I wonder how people are going to manage with slower feeds?