Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
http://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
Very good pictures, and clean. And not much CA visible.http://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
http://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
Very good pictures, and clean. And not much CA visible.http://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
A bit dark in the shadows, but I suppose you have exposed for the
brighter parts.
Have you done any sharpening?
Leif G-n
No, no sharpening needed as I can see. Looks good.Thanks - yeah there is a little CA around the shiny chrome stuff on
the boats but I was presently surprised. I printed one of them on
my not-really-photo-printer at 10"x8" on HP glossy paper and it
looks amazing!
I didn't do any sharpening - should I ?
Nice pix! The only criticizm I'd have would not be of the pictures themselves, but of the program you used to resize them... there's some aliasing that looks like maybe the interpolation algorythm was not the best. Did these start off as full size (2592*1944) shots? What did you use to resize them?http://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
Nice pix! The only criticizm I'd have would not be of the pictureshttp://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
themselves, but of the program you used to resize them... there's
some aliasing that looks like maybe the interpolation algorythm was
not the best. Did these start off as full size (2592*1944) shots?
What did you use to resize them?
Not a huge issue, but it is noticeable, especially since you have
so many crisp lines in some of these shots.
--http://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
Nice Pictureshttp://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
Thanks Darin - I think I know what you mean - they look better on my PC resized. I submitted them full size and fotopic resized them for me - I think in future I'll submit resized myself. What do you do?Nice pix! The only criticizm I'd have would not be of the pictureshttp://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
themselves, but of the program you used to resize them... there's
some aliasing that looks like maybe the interpolation algorythm was
not the best. Did these start off as full size (2592*1944) shots?
What did you use to resize them?
Not a huge issue, but it is noticeable, especially since you have
so many crisp lines in some of these shots.
If you have windows xp try windows power toys resizer..........LennyThanks Darin - I think I know what you mean - they look better onNice pix! The only criticizm I'd have would not be of the pictureshttp://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
themselves, but of the program you used to resize them... there's
some aliasing that looks like maybe the interpolation algorythm was
not the best. Did these start off as full size (2592*1944) shots?
What did you use to resize them?
Not a huge issue, but it is noticeable, especially since you have
so many crisp lines in some of these shots.
my PC resized. I submitted them full size and fotopic resized them
for me - I think in future I'll submit resized myself. What do you
do?
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/downloads/powertoys.aspIf you have windows xp try windows power toys resizer..........LennyThanks Darin - I think I know what you mean - they look better onNice pix! The only criticizm I'd have would not be of the pictureshttp://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
themselves, but of the program you used to resize them... there's
some aliasing that looks like maybe the interpolation algorythm was
not the best. Did these start off as full size (2592*1944) shots?
What did you use to resize them?
Not a huge issue, but it is noticeable, especially since you have
so many crisp lines in some of these shots.
my PC resized. I submitted them full size and fotopic resized them
for me - I think in future I'll submit resized myself. What do you
do?
Ah, fotopic is probably just doing nearest pixel resizing. To be honest, I've not really nailed down my resizing strategy... sometimes I'll just use bicubic in Photoshop, sometimes I'll use the linear (or whatever it's called) interpolation in QimagePro, and sometimes if I'm doing a batch for web use, I'll use breezebrowser. The last two are SUPPOSED to be superior to Photoshop, but I haven't actually compared yet (been meaning to do that).Thanks Darin - I think I know what you mean - they look better on
my PC resized. I submitted them full size and fotopic resized them
for me - I think in future I'll submit resized myself. What do you
do?
Heres an example of one done on fotopic with xp resizer at 1024x768 the original is 2592x1944 http://images.fotopic.net/?id=996882&outx=980&oq=0Ah, fotopic is probably just doing nearest pixel resizing. To beThanks Darin - I think I know what you mean - they look better on
my PC resized. I submitted them full size and fotopic resized them
for me - I think in future I'll submit resized myself. What do you
do?
honest, I've not really nailed down my resizing strategy...
sometimes I'll just use bicubic in Photoshop, sometimes I'll use
the linear (or whatever it's called) interpolation in QimagePro,
and sometimes if I'm doing a batch for web use, I'll use
breezebrowser. The last two are SUPPOSED to be superior to
Photoshop, but I haven't actually compared yet (been meaning to do
that).
Usually, if I'm DOWNsizing, I'll try to downsize to an even amount
(like if I'm downsizing 2592x1944 pix, I'll downsize to 864x648 for
the web). I think dividing be even multiples gives you a cleaner
result when using a poor interpolation like nearest pixel.
Thanks - any idea how that compares to Photoshop ? I'm about to post my first real macro attempts resized in photoshop (and 'saved for web' as compression) - makes them quicker to load!http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/downloads/powertoys.aspIf you have windows xp try windows power toys resizer..........LennyThanks Darin - I think I know what you mean - they look better onNice pix! The only criticizm I'd have would not be of the pictureshttp://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
themselves, but of the program you used to resize them... there's
some aliasing that looks like maybe the interpolation algorythm was
not the best. Did these start off as full size (2592*1944) shots?
What did you use to resize them?
Not a huge issue, but it is noticeable, especially since you have
so many crisp lines in some of these shots.
my PC resized. I submitted them full size and fotopic resized them
for me - I think in future I'll submit resized myself. What do you
do?
http://pauld.fotopic.net/show_collection.php?id=43269
if anyone is interested. All feedback appreciated. Think I may
have uploaded them too large !
