daniel_weiss1 Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 just started a photoblog called <a href="http://thegreatbookshavebeenwritten.com"> http:// thegreatbookshavebeenwritten.com </a> - all shot with a leica and a hasselblad, i've been trying to keep it updated very frequently (multiple times a week). check it out, tell me what you think. <br> <img src="http://thegreatbookshavebeenwritten.com/subwaytrain.jpg"> <br> <img src="http://thegreatbookshavebeenwritten.com/upsidedownflag.jpg"> thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugene_scherba Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 <p>Some nice photography there. The "this guy was waiting for me to leave so he could steal this bike" one is hilarious -- that is a nice vintage bike, BTW.</p> <p>If I may leave any comment, your images take way too long to download. The "Upside down flag" above, for example, is 428 KB large. An image with 600x600 px dimensions should take up around 200 KB, while yours take up twice as much. This makes browsing through your posts very slow and annoying. If you're interested in people viewing your pages, don't go for 99% or 100% JPEG quality when exporting in Photoshop or whatever, but stick with 90%, which is still reasonably free of artifacts yet results in a way more efficient compression.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael s. Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 Very good, Daniel. I enjoyed the photos. While they loaded reasonably fast on my connection, Eugene has a point: generally, at that screen size you don't really get any extra appearance "bang" for the delay "buck" with the heavier jpeg files. Your call, of course. Navigation issue: When I tried to go to the "next post" at the bottom, I was instead taken to the previous set -- the photos I'd already seen. But the main thing is you've got a number of very good photos. Thanks - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel_weiss1 Posted February 17, 2008 Author Share Posted February 17, 2008 thanks michael, i'll fix that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orvillerobertson Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 Daniel, very nice blog and photos. How long have you been photographing in NYC? I see so many more folks doing street photography around. Occasionally I'll chat with some of them just to see who's doing what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 I like the photos a lot. Not so keen on the presentation and navigation. A bit sluggish here, too. www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 Loaded right up on mine, lucky I guess. But I know my images are way to big when I upload, so I'm gonna try doing them at 90 percent. Its a fun blog, really like reading a journal and the pics work well that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted_fisher Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 On that idea of saving JPEGs, I would try this: Open the file in Photoshop. Choose IMAGE > DUPLICATE so you are now working with a copy. Choose IMAGE > IMAGE SIZE then make sure the "resample image" and "constrain proportions" boxes are checked. Set the resolution to 72, then choose your width or height (the other dimension will be set automatically). At this point, you may wish to sharpen if the image has softened in the resizing. If so, FILTER > SMART SHARPEN is probably your best bet. In older version, you might choose FILTER > UNSHARP MASK. Now, choose FILE > SAVE FOR WEB > then use the preset "JPEG HIGH." You'll get very good results, and the filesize will be very reasonable. tf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 Except some of us are using Aperture or Lightroom. It has some similar setting, but even at 80 and best quality, I'm getting 400, 600 mb files. in Aperture and 300 in Lightroom, which is weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
________1 Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 Barry, you mean 300K files, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 Sorry, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now