Web Image Question

[skibum187]

I'm trying to optimize some of my images for the web and I'm running into a problem. I use Livebooks for my site and they "require" that my images be 920px on the long end for horizontals and that the files are no more than 110k as JPEGs.
I have a number of images that have been highly digitally modified and include large portions of sky in the composition. Whenever I size my images according to Livebooks standards and adjust my JPEG slider down to match the 110k requirement (usually around 3 on the quality slider), I begin to get some nasty gradiation lines in the skies. Is there any way to have the quality I'm looking for in that small a file, or am I just doomed to either have bad image quality or slow load times?

(I should add that with most of my images, I do not have this issue...as I said above, it's mostly on my images that have been worked on extensively)

[luong]

I am surprised that they would have such requirements. After all, you are paying them to show your work at its best. Jpeg quality 3 is pretty low. I use myself something in the 6-8 range.

If you do not have the choice of image size, you can create a large white border (which doesn't use a lot of jpeg file size) so that your actual image will be smaller, but higher quality.

[Mark D Segal]

Another option would be to hook-up with an ISP which provides server space and create your own web galleries using Lightroom. That gives you complete control over all the variables and Lightroom makes very smart web galleries.

[skibum187]

Anyone else?
Switching hosts or using white borders simply aren't an option...

[rdonson]

Is there any way to have the quality I'm looking for in that small a file, or am I just doomed to either have bad image quality or slow load times?

(I should add that with most of my images, I do not have this issue...as I said above, it's mostly on my images that have been worked on extensively)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152150\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not that I'm aware of.  In similar circumstances I've selectively applied surface blur in Photoshop to lessen the artifacts.  Its a compromise but might be an option for you.

[frydesign]

I have not had much luck with getting quality jpgs out of PS with small sizes. I use a program called Thumbs plus for this. I find there were far fewer artifacts with it's jpg creator. You can batch it to do a whole folder at a time and add a personalized water mark at the same time. I used it to do my site.

I think it has a free 30 day trial.

thumbsplus website

good luck.

Bill

www.billfrymire.com

[brianrpatterson]

[attachment=3940:attachment]

Shouldn't be a problem in the first place - here's a 920 pixel wide JPG image saved at 50% in image quality... I used Imageready, of course, as it does very well in squeezing pixels without dropping image quality.

Brian