cc photos please

[redlazer]

056.jpg picture by redlazer - Photobucket
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i103/redlazer/060.jpg
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i103/redlazer/062.jpg
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i103/redlazer/065.jpg
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i103/redlazer/067-1.jpg
Sorry for some reason it will not allow me to upload the photos straight to the tread.

 

[RNCC]

056.jpg picture by redlazer - Photobucket
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i103/redlazer/060.jpg
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i103/redlazer/062.jpg
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i103/redlazer/065.jpg
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i103/redlazer/067-1.jpg
Sorry for some reason it will not allow me to upload the photos straight to the tread.

I like the angle on this one the best: http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i103/redlazer/065.jpg
The others just feel a little awkward to me because of the angle.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

056.jpg picture by redlazer - Photobucket

Sorry for some reason it will not allow me to upload the photos straight to the tread.

.

 

[Scoody]

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Pity the OP uses photobucket. :roll:

 

[g-fi]

Photobucket is THE DEBBIL.

 

[Scoody]

Pity the OP uses photobucket. :roll:

As do I for the most part.

 

[g-fi]

Wow, really? You don't find the compression of Photobucket an issue? I did a side by side comparison of Photobucket and Flikr one day after hosting a picture on Photobucket and being really frustrated with how soft it looked, I thought it was ME. Flikr was sharper and clearer by far. I often wonder if people who post their pictures here using Photobucket aren't doing themselves at least a little bit of a disservice when their photos are criticized for being soft or OOF, because I found it to really be THAT big of a difference. Photobucket's compression really bites.

 

[EchoingWhisper]

I would use ImageShack for everything less serious. The image quality is not as good as Flickr, but I really find 100MB per month problematic. For more important work, I would use Flickr.

 

[Bend The Light]

Read another thread about image colour profiles and it said that Flickr uses the embedded profiles, but Photobucket doesn't. So images will look as they should on Flickr, not on Photobucket.

 

[Forkie]

I would use ImageShack for everything less serious. The image quality is not as good as Flickr, but I really find 100MB per month problematic. For more important work, I would use Flickr.

If you subscribe to Flickr, that 100mb limit is removed. I think it's worth it.

 

[Robin Usagani]

If you sized it on your puter to the largest pixel the host use, it should not be a problem. Just like Facebook.

Wow, really? You don't find the compression of Photobucket an issue? I did a side by side comparison of Photobucket and Flikr one day after hosting a picture on Photobucket and being really frustrated with how soft it looked, I thought it was ME. Flikr was sharper and clearer by far. I often wonder if people who post their pictures here using Photobucket aren't doing themselves at least a little bit of a disservice when their photos are criticized for being soft or OOF, because I found it to really be THAT big of a difference. Photobucket's compression really bites.

 

[Compaq]

I usually resize my images for flickr. Going from 6MB to one really helps. But I've subscribed to flickr. It didn't cost much.

 

[clanthar]

Wow, really? You don't find the compression of Photobucket an issue? I did a side by side comparison of Photobucket and Flikr one day after hosting a picture on Photobucket and being really frustrated with how soft it looked, I thought it was ME. Flikr was sharper and clearer by far. I often wonder if people who post their pictures here using Photobucket aren't doing themselves at least a little bit of a disservice when their photos are criticized for being soft or OOF, because I found it to really be THAT big of a difference. Photobucket's compression really bites.

Really. I can't see the difference. Here's a side by side to show it.

I uploaded the same photo to both Flickr and Photobucket and here it is displayed from each site:

Flickr:

Photobucket:

I'm not seeing it. So I went ahead and downloaded both files from the hosting sites. I put them in Photoshop and layered them on top of each other and then set the blending mode to difference. If so much as one pixel were different between the two it would show. It doesn't.

Joe

 

[clanthar]

Read another thread about image colour profiles and it said that Flickr uses the embedded profiles, but Photobucket doesn't. So images will look as they should on Flickr, not on Photobucket.

That is not correct. Photobucket leaves the Photo's ICC profile intact. I suspect this is all an issue of uploading photos to hosting sites without first prepping the photos correctly.

Joe