Primarily Petroliana Shop Talk Forums Shop Talk Petroliana Forums Showcase and Stories, Petroliana Image file sizes on Shop Talk

Jack
I checked your pictures on the Vintage Photos post and they are HUGE files. It probably has more to do with how you scan them to begin with and has nothing to do with whether you use Imageshack or Photobucket.

You must be scanning at a very high dpi and even though you may size it to 640 x 480 pixels it is still at 600 dpi or whatever dpi you have your scanner set to. Try scanning at 150 dpi instead and then resizing to 640 x 480 or if you have Photoshop just change the dpi to 150 and resize it before you upload it to Imageshack or Photobucket.



[This message has been edited by the poor mans museum (edited 01-04-2008).]

Curt, I'am not sure how to reset my scanner to 150 dpi. so for now until I can get this figured out I will hold posting photos Thanks Jack

What kind of scanner do you have? If it's an Epson I may be able to walk you through it.

Curt

Hp officejet 6210 all in one

Jack, I use the HP 1210 "All in One". I will send you an email and see if I can't help with changing your scanner specs.

As I mentioned earlier - 72 dpi is all ya need for computer screens.

They can't show any higher resolution than that so you're wasting your time - and memory on Photobucket or Imageshack.

My photos are 8" wide at 72 dpi and only run about 250K to 300K. I'm not sure how fast they load for you dial-up guys - but they load gobs faster than the files Jack has been posting.

Later . . .

Jim

Jack,
Sorry, but I don't mean to pick on you. Some of your images are in PNG format instead of JPG format. PNG format has some nice features, but their file size is usually much larger than a JPG image saved at 80%. And the person viewing it can hardly tell the difference.

Below is the same image saved as JPG 80% compression at 53k file size.



Below is a PNG image that Jack posted at 1072k file size.



Do the math. A very similar image at 53k and 1072k. Why make the dial-up people needlessly wait? This isn't just Jack by any means. We all need to conserve file sizes in consideration of the many dial-up users out there.

I chose to offer support and direct upload to ImageShack just because I felt I needed to pick just one. I've learned their system and I help people regularly in troubleshooting postings and first image uploads. I have enough to do rather than learn and offer support for several image hosts. If you're having good service with somebody else, stick with it. ImageShack works fine for me.

------------------
Jim "Oldgas" Potts
Your host and moderator

[This message has been edited by Oldgas (edited 01-04-2008).]

I'll have to agree that Photobucket is much much better than image shack! I usually skip those pics. with the annoying pop ups from image shack. I've been using Photobucket for over a year or so now and have had no problems and they give you a huge storage space. I even store my videos on there.

Mike

Just tried a photo in the test section after I finally changed the ppi from 200 to 75 any one want to check and see if it loads faster for those on dial up or do i still have more to fix. Thanks Jack

Jim, I'd be happy to be a resource to walk people through Photobucket if needed and I appreciate your desire to stay with what you know.

Jack, it was great talking to you today and happy to see you got it worked out. It's great when people stick with it and figure this stuff out because we all like seeing the pictures. As Jim can attest I was a techno dork when I started posting here and couldn't post or resize a photo to save my life. Once you get it down it's like riding a bicycle.

Curt, Bob Richards and Chuck " gaspedler" and Jim Potts Thanks for your Help. still have to get it changed from PNG file to JPG file but will get it figured out. Thanks again for you help. Jack

That does load faster Jack, but it is a smaller pixel dimension size. It is still a PNG image format. Look for a choice to save as JPG.

The dpi issue is complicated. The abbreviation dpi stands for "dots per inch" When scanning a 2 inch square image, scanning at 100 dpi will result in a 200 x 200 pixel image. Scan at 300 dpi and you get a 600 x 600 image. Certainly more pixels mean a larger file size. But there is more to it.

If you want to scan to get fine details or a larger image, the higher dpi is the way to go. You can always crop or resize smaller to get the pixel dimensions you want.

Different graphic software systems work differently. It is not always obvious or easy to separate the dpi setting from the pixel dimension setting when the image is being saved. The file memory size is affected more by pixel size dimensions and jpg compression levels than by dpi by itself.

After the image has been scanned, adjusting the dpi, while retaining the same pixel dimensions, does not have significant effect on file size in my experience.




------------------
Jim "Oldgas" Potts
Your host and moderator