Saving for the web - what's the best technique?

[BekahAura]

I'm trying to get some of my pet portraits uploaded onto my new Photobucket account so I can post them here, and I'm having trouble finding the best way to save them for the web.

When I choose to use the "save for the web" option in Photoshop and try to lower the quality enough to make the file size 150kb or less, it seems to desaturate the color so that it's not as vibrant.

I know that web viewing only requires 75 dpi.. is that right? Should I be reducing the dpi instead of saving for the web?

What do you usually aim for in file size when posting here? And are there any other ways of reducing the file size with minimal quality reduction?

Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!

Thanks,
Bekah

 

[Josh66]

I just make them 7-800 pixels on the long side.

I don't really see any need to get fancier than that...

 

[rufus5150]

I save out of lightroom but when I did out of photoshop, I just saved it as a jpeg rather than the 'for the web' option (I'd make a copy first, it's sorta the long way around).

I always save mine with 700 being the long side and 72ppi.

 

[BekahAura]

Thanks guys!

For some reason, when I changed the pixels on the long side and adjusted to 72 pixels Photoshop was telling me the file was 700k, before saving for the web.

But when I just saved it (not save for web) and looked at the properties of the photo it was was less than photoshop was telling me.

Hmmm... I dunno, but thanks, this works.

Bekah

 

[KmH]

....I know that web viewing only requires 75 dpi.. is that right? Should I be reducing the dpi instead of saving for the web?...

Web viewing doesn't require any dpi or more correctly ppi. (dpi is a press printing term.)

For web viewing ppi is a meaningless number because there are no 'inches' on the web, only pixels. The only numbers that matter are the pixel dimensions.

Why 150 Kb?

It can be tough to get avatars or any image down to 150 Kb or less.

A good trick is to be sure all the metadata (EXIF, IPTC) for the image is stripped.

 

[rufus5150]

For web viewing ppi is a meaningless number because there are no 'inches' on the web, only pixels

Actually, some browsers are honoring the ppi value now.

 

[Derrel]

I'm trying to get some of my pet portraits uploaded onto my new Photobucket account so I can post them here, and I'm having trouble finding the best way to save them for the web.

When I choose to use the "save for the web" option in Photoshop and try to lower the quality enough to make the file size 150kb or less, it seems to desaturate the color so that it's not as vibrant.

I know that web viewing only requires 75 dpi.. is that right? Should I be reducing the dpi instead of saving for the web?

What do you usually aim for in file size when posting here? And are there any other ways of reducing the file size with minimal quality reduction?

Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!

Thanks,
Bekah

I am guessing you are using a Windows computer and a web browser that is not color-aware. I think what you are seeing when you say the color is desaturated is that when working in Photoshop, you're working in Adobe RGB color space, and your copy of PS is converting the images to the sRGB color space for the web. Your working color space and the final color profile being assigned by your copy of PS as it is configured are different.

If you re-configure your copy of Photoshop so that the working color space is set to be sRGB, that ought to help you edit the pictures so that when PS saves them for the web and assigns an sRGB color profile, the images will look the way you want them to look.

 

[BekahAura]

KmH,

Thanks for clarrifying, I knew dpi was wrong when people responded with ppi. I was confused lol.

I'm not sure why I chose 150 kb, I just wanted it to be as small as possible for fast loading.

Is there any fast way to strip the file information, other than going into file info and manually deleting it?

Derrel,

You're correct; I am using a Windows computer, not sure if my browser is color-aware or not (IE 7 I think). I will try out your suggestion though, thanks.

Bekah

 

[KmH]

KmH,

Thanks for clarrifying, I knew dpi was wrong when people responded with ppi. I was confused lol.

I'm not sure why I chose 150 kb, I just wanted it to be as small as possible for fast loading.

Is there any fast way to strip the file information, other than going into file info and manually deleting it?

Derrel,

You're correct; I am using a Windows computer, not sure if my browser is color-aware or not (IE 7 I think). I will try out your suggestion though, thanks.

Bekah

Yes, click on File > Save for Web and Devices > in the dialog box find the Metadata box, open the drop down menu by clicking on the down arrow, select none.

I don't think IE 7 is color aware.

 

[Overread]

100kb and 600pixels on the longest side is the most limiting I have ever had to resize images for (only one website forum sticks with this).

My advice comes in two parts:

Stage 1 : resizing for the web. Based on the idea that you are starting with an image of 3000pixels or more on the longest side first edit the image as normal. Then at the end of the editing process perform your normal sharpening method (since sharpening always goes last). After sharpening save youself a copy of the image fullsize - I tend to either save this as a TIFF or PSD so that I have a copy that won't degrade if I adjust it in small amounts and also retains the layers in photoshop from editing.
After that I resize the image down to 2000 pixels on the longest side and then sharpen the shot again - often I find that the amount I sharpen by at this stage is quite similar to the first stage, but I always check and sharpen only as much as I feel is needed (though it actually does not matter if you oversharpen a little).
Then I resize down again to 1000pixels on the longest side and sharpen again - often this is just a quick clean up sharpen and very little is needed.

I do things this way because resizing nearly always results in a loss of image sharpness through image data loss (as you cut the image down in size) so sharpening helps to restore that lost sharpness as well as help to present the image in the best possible manner for a web output.

In the past (before Stage 2) I would then save this 1000 pixel image as a JPEG and resize it again to 720pixels on the longest side - sometimes sharpen again but a tiny amound - and then save as a JPEG. I would then upload both versions to my photobucket account - the 720 to be posted in a thread or forum whilst the 1000 is given as a link that people can follow to view it larger. This allows for the image to be small enough for most websites and won't end up being autoresized or breaking the page layout.

Stage 2: Get a flickr account and dump the photobucket.
With a flickr account the flickr program auto resizes the image for you when up upload to it and its one of the few sites that also runs a good sharpening code over the image as well so that you do not get lower grade smaller versions. You can upload even the fullsized images if you so desire and still get smaller auto resized versions from flickr (sadly these are auto set limits and as far as I know you can't adjust them).
However I tend to only ever upload the 1000pixel versions to flickr. I can then use the auto made 500pixel versions on websites whilst the 1000pixel versions again sit as links.

A paid flickr account also gives you a lot more for your money than a paid photobucket account No upload limits as well as infinite space on flickr are great things in the longer term; and belive me its best to start early rather than change mid way and have to move everything from one account to another ( a major headache if you run a website or blog as you have to rebuild all the image links again).
Further the terms and conditions for site use for photobucket are not photographer friendly and contain a clause which does allow photobucket royalty free use of your images (even though they claim they don't use it). Flickr has a far better terms and conditions for their site.

 

[pbelarge]

Overread
I have been wondering which is better, or why some choose one site over the other - flicker/photobucket.

I have used photobucket for years, storing and transfering my electrical shots for website transfer.
I notice that flickr seems to be the more popular site with most here.

Thanks for the info, I will look into a flickr account, although I did start a photobucket account for my "fun" photos about 3 weeks ago.

 

[pbelarge]

Overread
Maybe, if we here can impose on you, you could write up a little more about the flickr setup and use, and then have it posted as a sticky. People like me do not really know or understand how all of this works, and you seem to have a very good grip on the setup and usage of it.
Just a thought....

 

[Overread]

Yah I still use my photobucket for fun things and such as well as hosting images that are not mine on the net (eg re-edits of other peoples stuff to show them) - however each time I head back I find that its interface has changed - more ads have appeared in annoying places and that its just cluttered up.

It's good for light use but for dedicated and serious photography stuff I find flickr far superior in pretty much every way. Flickr is more limiting though for a free account so there is more insentive to pay, in my experience its worth the small annual cost (its not even as much as a years subscription to a magazine)

I could give that a shot - probably would get it added into the existing using TPF stick - I've still got to write my macro section sticky though!

 

[pbelarge]

What are you waiting for...:mrgreen:


I think it is absolutely amazing, that I am in conversation with a person I never met and you are an ocean away. The real wonder of the web.
Thanks for the help and your quick response!!!

 

[Hamtastic]

...it seems to desaturate the color so that it's not as vibrant.

This should not be happening. It sounds like a color space mismatch. If you are shooting jpegs and don't know anything about color space then it's probably just easiest to make sure your camera and Photoshop (Bridge, Lightroom, whatever...) are set to sRGB color space.

If you want to use some other color space in camera or with the processing software then at some point (usually one of the last steps before saving) you need to convert the color space to sRGB (Edit>Convert Color Settings, or something like that).

The web, most monitors, and most lab printing machines use the sRGB color space, or something similar to it.