Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Question for Chris Sanderson  (Read 1560 times)

RMW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
Question for Chris Sanderson
« on: September 21, 2017, 03:08:05 PM »

Hello Chris.
Need a little of your good help submitting for the 'Southern Exposure' Grant.
From a 200 MB tif file in Bridge chose Tools, PS, Image Processor. Then chose JPG and 800 pixels max. each side. Also chose sRGB, Quality 12, and ICC profile.
Imported back into PS the image looks extremely "fuzzy" and dull and sharpening doesn't correct it.
Please tell me where to find instructions for this kind of conversion or where I screwed up so I can comply with the submission guidelines.
Thank you very much.
Richard
Logged

BobShaw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1237
    • Aspiration Images
Re: Question for Chris Sanderson
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2017, 08:09:38 PM »

Rather than hoping that he will stumble on to this it is probably best to send him a Personal Message.
Logged
Website - http://AspirationImages.com
Fine Art Photography

Chris Sanderson

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2632
Re: Question for Chris Sanderson
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2017, 04:09:56 AM »

Hi Richard. It certainly sounds as if you are doing all the right things.
Perhaps you are viewing the resulting image larger than its native size?
Logged
Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape

RMW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
Re: Question for Chris Sanderson
« Reply #3 on: September 27, 2017, 11:12:13 AM »

Chris,
Thank you for your reply.
As you suggested, for a fair rendition it's necessary to view the image at it's native size.
And that leads me to a question and concern. How can a foto entered into a contest with a maximum pixel size of 800 on a side be accurately seen at such a small version? Doesn't it lose a substantial degree of resolution?  Also, when the original image is changed to a smaller color space a lot of good color is lost.
I know it's necessary for practical reasons to limit size. I'm wondering if in the future the minimum size could be a little larger?
Richard
Logged

Chris Sanderson

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2632
Re: Question for Chris Sanderson
« Reply #4 on: September 27, 2017, 11:35:26 AM »

Agreed - it's small. We are working on replacing the whole Endowment website and larger images will be on our priority list.

The limitation was originally created simply to restrain bandwidth costs.

Logged
Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape

RMW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
Re: Question for Chris Sanderson
« Reply #5 on: September 27, 2017, 12:06:37 PM »

Thank you Chris for such a quick response.
Glad to know you'll be making some revisions.
Appreciate all you do to make this a valuable website.
Richard
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up