Best image?

[Derrel]

As to the exposure differences...look down into the shadow area at the base of the flowers, and the darker detail in A's shot makes me think it's under-exposed compared to B or C...the manufacturer's often fudge ISO values a wee bit...

Yeah...I agree...it's become hard to tell DX from FX on the web, now that cameras are so high in MP count that even on the biggest monitors, we are always looking at down-rezzed images; this is no longer the 2.7 or 4.2 MP era... User technique, lighting, and post-processing all are HUGE factors in how images look on the web.

I think the most-critical aspects now are determining what size to make the image, and what company "serves" the image, and how that server either mangles the image, or does not mangle the image. The post-processing and sharpening and color profile assignment steps are big deals.
Some web hosts seem to absolutely crush images; others do not.

 

[Ted Evans]

As to the exposure differences...look down into the shadow area at the base of the flowers, and the darker detail in A's shot makes me think it's under-exposed compared to B or C...the manufacturer's often fudge ISO values a wee bit...

Yeah...I agree...it's become hard to tell DX from FX on the web, now that cameras are so high in MP count that even on the biggest monitors, we are always looking at down-rezzed images; this is no longer the 2.7 or 4.2 MP era... User technique, lighting, and post-processing all are HUGE factors in how images look on the web.

I think the most-critical aspects now are determining what size to make the image, and what company "serves" the image, and how that server either mangles the image, or does not mangle the image. The post-processing and sharpening and color profile assignment steps are big deals.
Some web hosts seem to absolutely crush images; others do not.

I agree Derrel. Your comments are very much appreciated and helpful and have given me a number of things to process, thanks.