Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: The Fallacy of Judging Image Quality Online-article  (Read 2520 times)

melgross

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 58
The Fallacy of Judging Image Quality Online-article
« on: September 28, 2009, 05:51:49 pm »

I hope it's ok to post a topic about an article here, and so I'm going to try.

I would like to state that I agree with this article 1,000%. Possibly more.

I've been saying it for years.

In my own lab, customers would ask me why their prints looked different from the way it did on their monitors.

They would then ask why it looked different on my monitors from the way it did on their monitors.

They would ask me why it looked much closer to my monitors than it did to their monitors.

And then they would want to know where most of the noise went.

Etc., etc.

It's difficult to disabuse people online from comparing images. It's the only way they have to do it.

But the truth should be told.

I'm happy Michael did.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
The Fallacy of Judging Image Quality Online-article
« Reply #1 on: September 29, 2009, 10:40:39 am »

There is this drawback: accepting the truth of the argument, which I do, it doesn't do much to create confidence in having a website, which I am in the process of trying to set up. One could ask: what ¡s the point?

Rob C

Justan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1928
    • Justan-Elk.com
The Fallacy of Judging Image Quality Online-article
« Reply #2 on: September 29, 2009, 03:28:28 pm »

> I hope it's ok to post a topic about an article here, and so I'm going to try.


Got linkage to the article?

DarkPenguin

  • Guest
Logged

tonysmith

  • Guest
The Fallacy of Judging Image Quality Online-article
« Reply #4 on: September 29, 2009, 04:01:12 pm »

Quote from: Rob C
There is this drawback: accepting the truth of the argument, which I do, it doesn't do much to create confidence in having a website, which I am in the process of trying to set up. One could ask: what ¡s the point?

Rob C

I interpret Michael's article as being about the more technical aspects of image quality, and I agree. However I don't think that invalidates online images (or web sites) for judging other qualities of the image and the photographer. I don't need a print to know that most of the work I see on or through this site is way better than mine. I'm sure I will feel the same about Rob's if I ever see his web site.

Tony


Logged

pegelli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1664
    • http://pegelli.smugmug.com/
The Fallacy of Judging Image Quality Online-article
« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2009, 01:33:08 am »

I've said this in the other thread on the essay as well, I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. Getting the ultimate and final answer on sensor and lens qualities from online images and 100% crops is utterly impossible for the reasons stated in the essay. However to claim they are absolutely meaningless and aren't worth looking at to judge these qualities is just as wrong. Useful information can be had from them, even Michael himself decided to not use his A900 above ISO800, but take his 5DII or 3x for higher ISO's, based on 100% crops he saw on his monitor.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2009, 01:33:50 am by pegelli »
Logged
pieter, aka pegelli

jasonrandolph

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 554
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/shutterpunk
The Fallacy of Judging Image Quality Online-article
« Reply #6 on: September 30, 2009, 05:37:49 pm »

I think Michael is right on.  There is no comparison between a web image at 72ppi in sRGB and a big print at 360dpi in ProPhotoRGB.  There are color shifts, noise, and other things that detract from a fine art print seen in person.  However, for judging composition, the "artist's eye", and for gaining exposure for your work, I think the web is a valuable tool.  The important thing is that we know and understand its limits.  But without photography on the internet.  I would've missed out on the work of many artists whose work I was first exposed to on my LCD screen at home.
Pages: [1]   Go Up