Image quality for website work

I have a cabinet shop.
I bought a Canon 5D camera to shoot pictures of installed kitchen cabinets.

The ultimate output of these images will be for a website and potentially a 4 color press coffee table book.

For the book I know I will want to capture data in RAW, with as high of resolution possible.
For the website I want clear, crisp images that load quickly onto a browser.

Will I get better images for a website if I shoot them directly in JPEG mode, or would these ultimately present better with post processing efforts, starting with RAW?

I'm willing to do whatever gets me the best for both purposes, even if it means composing the image then shooting it twice (in both modes).

Any ideas here ?.........or can somebody recommend a good tutorial for how to optimize photos for a website.

Thanks,

Jarvis

You could use the cameras ability to shoot RAW + jpg at the same time.

Personally I would use the RAW file to process a full size image (I'd create a psd photoshop format file).

Then, after any further processing, like removing a mark, I'd fork to two sizes, one for print and one for web, I would use actions and the photoshop CS2 image to give me the two versions if I had a lot of images.

There are videos on using the image processor here:
http://www.russellbrown.com/tips_tech.html

You have photoshop?

Andrew

Currently in beta (but free for now). It will allow you to better manipulate your RAW files and can easily output jpg's in various sizes.
--
Don't anthropomorphize digital cameras. They don't like it.

Sorry but the real answer is: contact a photographer that knows how to shoot these things. They exist. And do a much better job than you ever will.

If you don't even know how to optimize you pics for website use, how can you ever have the knowledge to shoot these cabinets properly? Soryy, there is no way.

That's the problem nowadays...people simply buy an expensive camera and go the DIY way...and stand to loose a lot of business because of it.

If your job is to sell cabinets, then sell cabinets. If you want good images on your site, contact a pro photographer with expertise in that field. You'll be amazed to see how he/she works. And you'll be cured from you DIY itch forever.

Jarvis393 said:

I have a cabinet shop.
I bought a Canon 5D camera to shoot pictures of installed kitchen
cabinets.
The ultimate output of these images will be for a website and
potentially a 4 color press coffee table book.

For the book I know I will want to capture data in RAW, with as
high of resolution possible.
For the website I want clear, crisp images that load quickly onto a
browser.

Will I get better images for a website if I shoot them directly in
JPEG mode, or would these ultimately present better with post
processing efforts, starting with RAW?

I'm willing to do whatever gets me the best for both purposes, even
if it means composing the image then shooting it twice (in both
modes).

Any ideas here ?.........or can somebody recommend a good tutorial
for how to optimize photos for a website.

Thanks,

Jarvis

Click to expand...

Start with a RAW file for best results.

You need to process the images significantly differently for each use (print and web).

--

Graphic Design + Web Design + Photography

http://www.molecule.com.au

I'll bet that "professional" photographer's first photograph was pretty crappy.
My hunch is that yours was also.

Are you glad you stuck with it?

Hi Jarvis,

Most folks would agree that if you shoot two images with two different cameras and lens and properly post processed them and posted those images on the web it would not be possible to tell which image came from which camera.

So this is not really a camera question, but more a post processing question. And maybe even more so a web design question. Most web sites dont use images larger than 1280X960 even for background. And often the images are a lot smaller. And most moniters wont display more than 72 dpi, which is relatively low compared to the 350 dpi (or more) some printers use.

So the first thing you need to do is come up with a web site design that specifies how large the images you will be using are, and what resolution (like 72 dpi) you will be using. In general you want to reduce the size of the original image by 10% or less till it is the size of the image your web page specifies. Then save that image at 72 dpi.

Because of the huge reduction in image size and resolution you will take some hit in IQ, and this explains why the camera is much less important for images to be displayed on the web.

This is not to say there are not a lot of considerations about web design, IQ as it relates to the time it takes to display images, and other considerations. These are not tasks you can not master, but you may want to get an introductory book on web page creation and see what it has to say about images on the web, as well as other topics.

Thanks Tom.

As it turns out, my camera will shoot RAW + JPEG with one shutter release.
This will save some strokes at the jobsite when I do my photography.

I've seen websites with wonderful images that load quickly.
I'm guessing this has a lot to do with server speed and traffic on the website.
My original question was how much the actual image had to do with this.

I have been doing some experimenting with image size & resolution.

I can get a file down to 160KB now and blow a close up image big enough to fill my 20 inch monitor without any apparent pixelation on the screen.

I could not do that with my Nikon Coolpix.

I'm still learning, but I know more now than I did last week.

Hi Jarvis,

There have been some guidelines posted here about using Photoshop and saving the image as a jpg with 7 or 8 quality leve. This is probably as low as I would want to go for most web applications.

I would also point out that your monitor size of 20 inches may be a little big to shoot for. Here at dpreview and several other sites there is sorta an understanding that 800X600 is about as large an image as you realistically want to post. This is not to say that lots of folks dont have bigger monitors, just that download time and the possibility of folks wanting to buy your cabinets (or what ever) having smaller monitors means if you post big images and monitors viewing them are smaller than the image you risk losing customers.

This is why I suggested a book on web design. If the truth be known the design of a web site is often more important than the IQ of the images on the sight.

TLE said:

Sorry but the real answer is: contact a photographer that knows how
to shoot these things. They exist. And do a much better job than
you ever will.

Click to expand...

Agree, the money spend on 5D with lenses and stuff would have 'bought' some really nice pictures for years. You don't buy some expensive scissors so you don't have to go to a professional hairdresser...

--
wild images and such at my website
http://www.x32.nl

Mike_V said:

Start with a RAW file for best results.

You need to process the images significantly differently for each
use (print and web).

Click to expand...

I like starting with RAW also, even if the final product will be used on the web, to have more flexiblilty in adjusting white balance and exposure. "Manyk", who posts on the 30D/20D/... forum sometimes, wrote an excellent photoshop action that I use all the time for preparing images for the web. See http://news.deviantart.com/article/20250/

-Jim

TLE said:

Sorry but the real answer is: contact a photographer that knows how
to shoot these things. They exist. And do a much better job than
you ever will.

Click to expand...

I'm surprised you weren't shot down in flames for that - even though you are right.

But then again, you're not really, and it's because you are making exactly the same mistake that you are accusing the OP of! You don't know enough about the subject you are talking about.

I'm a graphic designer, I produce brochures and stuff. I have a customer who makes specialist conversions to vehicles. Some are one-offs, some they might make a dozen of at most. The only time they ever have a complete, freshly painted vehicle for photography is the day they come out of the factory - they are working vehicles, within a week they will never be fit to photograph again. Sometimes they have a window of as little as an hour or two before the vehicle is collected. So they take their own photographs, nowadays with the 20D I recommended to them. They've had to learn how to do it, and they produce pretty good work. Two years ago they didn't, but that was then and this is now.

I have an acquaintance - not a customer this time - who makes fitted kitchen furniture. Not as grand as "cabinet maker" but the principle is the same. The only time the furniture is fit to photograph is when they have just completed their installation. Within a day, the family are using it and photography becomes impossible... you get the idea.

I looked at the OP's posting history. A month ago he was asking questions like "what's autofocus". A month from now he will be asking much more taxing questions - you wait and see. I wish him the best and look forward to seeing some pictures when he has learned a bit more. (At least, I hope so!)

Jarvis393 said:

I'll bet that "professional" photographer's first photograph was
pretty crappy.
My hunch is that yours was also.

Are you glad you stuck with it?

Click to expand...

I'm sure your first cabinets where flimsy, aren't you glad you stuck with it?

Why the defensiveness? You seek "free" advice to do the work of a pro. Please, tell me how to make and hang my own cabinets since I don't want to pay that silly cabinet maker - it's the hammer and saw that does the work anyway.

Hypocrisy is alive and well on DPR!

Joe

Steve Balcombe wrote:
SNIP

Steve Balcombe said:

I looked at the OP's posting history.

Click to expand...

So did I, and that is why I offered the best advice I could. I thing it is a good idea to start off with the best quality tools you can what ever you are doing.

In his case a 5d is probably the best camera for him with a WA lens. And you are right his questions show he is learning. I could tell he still does not understand the difference between a quality image for print as opposed to a quality image for web use. But a good book on creating web pages will answer lots of his questions and Ill bet he does OK.

Anyone who has the cash to spring for a 5d has to have something on the ball.

Yep, no question about it. This guy is definitely too stupid to ever learn to use a good camera. He is just a cabinet maker after all. What can you expect out of a guy who is just a craftsman.

Were you born or were you dropped out of the sky at 43 years of age with a 1Ds mkII in your hands. I didn't know a whole lot when I was born, learned quickly. By the time I was 12, I even began to learn where people like me came from. By the time Digital cameras came along I was ready to learn about them too, just like I learned to flush a toilet at age 3 1/2.

You might be terribly surprised, but I'll bet this guy can learn to take the pictures he needs to illustrate his cabinet work. I was able to do that myself, unbelievably. You can stop by my web site and see for yourself. Nope I didn't hire a pro. I didn't even ask a pro how to do it. I didn't even ask you for advice. Surely wish I had had the opportunity to, though, so you could have vented your ego at me instead of this poor b@st@rd.
--
Dave Lewis

I can't tell you how to shoot a quality picture or how to post-process in a way that will draw people to your cabinets. That's up to you to accomplish with your combination of tools (camera, lens, tripod, computer and software) and skills.

Beyond that, here are the proper steps:

1) Shoot RAW. Do not shoot JPEG.
2) Post-process the RAW file to your liking and save it at 300dpi
3) Save it as a TIFF

4) If it isn't already (depends on how your RAW converter and associated software is set up), convert the pic's "Mode" to 8-bit. THIS IS IMPORTANT.

5) Save ("Save-AS") the converted 8-bit TIFF image as a JPEG version to highest quality (#12 in Photoshop or Photoshop Elements)

6) Re-size the saved JPEG to 800 pixels wide @96dpi (NOT 72dpi) by clicking "Constrain Proportions" and "Resample Image" in the "Save" dialog box
7) Save the re-sized JPEG

You should end up with a file anywhere between 1.6MB and 2.6MB, depending on the depth of the image (in pixels) and other factors. If you feel that's too large for a quick download on dial-up (it's not a big file for broadband), then Save it again and reduce the quality slightly by selecting #10...but no lower.

Beyond that, you should reduce the file's PHYSICAL size (say, from 800 pixels wide to 600 pixels wide), but NOT its quality level. The compression below #10 is considerable and will smear details in the cabinets such as grain, finish, hardware, etc.

Then...just upload...and good luck.

--
SteveG
http://www.pbase.com/smgarey

Yep, and in a month you'll look back and realize just all the wealth of stuff you've put together for yourself, and because you did in on your own it will mean so much more and make you so much more self sufficient. Life is learing. Learning is doing. Doing is having.

Jarvis393 said:

I'm still learning, but I know more now than I did last week.

Click to expand...

--
Dave Lewis

Well, put it this way, come along here and sincerely ask for some help and then have arrogant studs shower you with all kinds of insider cr@p and see if you don't bristle a bit.

Let me get this right: a hypocrite is someone who asks for help, gets repeatedly slapped in the face, then thrashes out a bit in self defense. I think I understand now.

Could you tell me how to flush a toilet.

Joe Marques said:

I'm sure your first cabinets where flimsy, aren't you glad you
stuck with it?

Why the defensiveness? You seek "free" advice to do the work of a
pro. Please, tell me how to make and hang my own cabinets since I
don't want to pay that silly cabinet maker - it's the hammer and
saw that does the work anyway.

Hypocrisy is alive and well on DPR!

Joe

Click to expand...

--
Dave Lewis

Amazing how someone who "does this for a living" is willing to give the original poster help, while the arrogant wanabies are showering him with disdain. Funny world out there.
--
Dave Lewis

Dave Lewis said:

Well, put it this way, come along here and sincerely ask for some
help and then have arrogant studs shower you with all kinds of
insider cr@p and see if you don't bristle a bit.

Click to expand...

What ever happened to paying for professional service? Why should someone give free advice for a product shoot? Does the OP give away free installation tips to DIY's?

Member said:

Let me get this right: a hypocrite is someone who asks for help,
gets repeatedly slapped in the face, then thrashes out a bit in
self defense. I think I understand now.

Click to expand...

No a hypocrit is someone who charges a fee to build and/or install cabinets - not exactly rocket science yet high profit work YET expects FREE insight on how to do a professional product shoot of those cabinets.

Member said:

Could you tell me how to flush a toilet.

Click to expand...

Nah, you're the only one who's full of $hit here, you figure it out.

Joe

Member said:

Member said:

I'm sure your first cabinets where flimsy, aren't you glad you
stuck with it?

Why the defensiveness? You seek "free" advice to do the work of a
pro. Please, tell me how to make and hang my own cabinets since I
don't want to pay that silly cabinet maker - it's the hammer and
saw that does the work anyway.

Hypocrisy is alive and well on DPR!

Joe

Click to expand...

--
Dave Lewis

Click to expand...