Need advice on re-sizing digital images please

[LeeStar]

I keep my master images as large and highest quality I can, obviously. For sharing on different sites and uploading however, large files are a disadvantage. They take so long, and of course some sites have file size limits. Large files don't work so well either when you're wanting to put them on a digital photo frame or media player/viewer. So my question is, what's the best way to reduce file size while still keeping the image as crisp, clear, and as high quality as possible? In Photoshop when you save a file you have the option of saving at different qualities. I've heard people say the differences aren't that noticeable. Or is re-sizing the image better? If so, what's the optimum limit on pixel size reduction? Is there a "sweet spot" file size I should be keeping within? Or should I be resizing another way? I'm looking for a happy medium of having the best quality I can, while having the file small enough that it doesn't cause me trouble when I'm tying to post it on the web. Yes I can (and do) use a crappy small image if I'm just posting a pic to Facebook and something better if I'm entering a photo contest... but ideally I'm looking for one standard I can apply to every image, because this creating several copies of the same photo for different purposes is becoming way too time consuming for me! I'm one of those weirdoes who would rather spend the time actually out taking photos than working on the computer.

Thanks!

 

[Don Kondra]

Most sites I frequent suggest 1000 wide and a rez of 72.

That will keep the image file to ~ 250k.

I have done tests with file sizes of 250k/500k/750k and on a computer monitor it's difficult to "see" the difference.

Be aware, if you let a web sites software do the downsizing the results are usually unsatisfactory.

Cheers, Don

 

[KmH]

I keep my master images as large and highest quality I can, obviously. For sharing on different sites and uploading however, large files are a disadvantage. They take so long, and of course some sites have file size limits. Large files don't work so well either when you're wanting to put them on a digital photo frame or media player/viewer.

So my question is, what's the best way to reduce file size while still keeping the image as crisp, clear, and as high quality as possible?

In Photoshop when you save a file you have the option of saving at different qualities. I've heard people say the differences aren't that noticeable.

Or is re-sizing the image better? If so, what's the optimum limit on pixel size reduction? Is there a "sweet spot" file size I should be keeping within? Or should I be resizing another way?

I'm looking for a happy medium of having the best quality I can, while having the file small enough that it doesn't cause me trouble when I'm tying to post it on the web. Yes I can (and do) use a crappy small image if I'm just posting a pic to Facebook and something better if I'm entering a photo contest... but ideally I'm looking for one standard I can apply to every image, because this creating several copies of the same photo for different purposes is becoming way too time consuming for me! I'm one of those weirdoes who would rather spend the time actually out taking photos than working on the computer.

Thanks!

FIFY
Do some of your own experiments.

Save a photo as a JPEG at a Quality setting of 12.
Save the same photo as a JPEG at a Quality setting of 2.
See any difference?

Here is Q = 12 (file size - 8.1 mb):

Here is Q = 2 (file size - 643 kb):

 

[LeeStar]

Well, I just figured I'd get some 'experts' input rather than make myself crazy with hours of re-sizing/scrutinizing (I can easily make myself nuts! LOL). Quality/size can make a huge difference in some of the contests I enter -- people will enlarge the photo way up and scrutinize the clarity of the image at huge magnification! I see that it can't easily be done on this site, which is good. Thanks for the tips!

 

[KmH]

Most sites I frequent suggest 1000 wide and a rez of 72.

For online display a ppi setting of 72 (rez) is meaningless. A photo that is set to 1 ppi will be exactly the same size as the same photo set to 1000 ppi.

The photo I just posted is 4288 px by 2848 px, which is way bigger than most computer displays can show at one time, and both are set to 300 ppi which obviously did not affect the file size of the photo saved at low quality.
I have set my TPF preferences to 1000 px x 700 pixels, which means any image I post larger than 1-000 x 7000 gets re-sized by TPF and as can be seen in post #3 TPF then limits the size displayed to 1024 px on the long side

 

[Tee]

There used to be a great video tutorial on the www by Jason Herman called "resizing for the web". It's the method I use and I like it. There are probably 30 different ways to skin the image resize cat but this works for me.

Once you have completed your image but before final sharpening (this is key):

Select Image size tab > select 1000px on the long end> in same open box, choose bicubic sharper then "ok"

It'll then process your image to the new size. Click actual size and you can see how clean your image is

Then select "save for web use". I like this option because I can embed custom metadata into the image if I want.

When you get the pop up box, make sure it's set to bicubic and not bicubic sharper (that way you won't sharpen image twice) , then export

Then ctl+alt+z to reverse your resizing. Now you're back to your high res file and can sharpen accordingly and export as you see fit.

When resizing and saving two versions of the same image, I rename the file ending in .ws for web size and .hr for high res