DervMafia Eddy Current Dyno Upgrade

[zx_volcane]

quick one to suggest for the hosting of pics mr Lobb..

if you reduce the size it wont necessarily reduce the size much and they will still load slow, reducing the quality down to half its original, for the purposes of hosting and viewing on most moniters, is absolutely fine and will not degrade any visible quality in the photo itself..

when saving from photoshop if you have it, reduce the canvas size to something more fitting and then save with a lower quality (3-6 is a good shout) this will substantially reduce the file size but without noticeable degredation in quality of image.

nice shout tho.. will have to come down and say hi at some point with the stage3 and do some test runs!!! (for beer of course)

hmm wouldn't quite agree on this, wouldn't go lower than 60% quality on a jpeg, DCT compression generally produces pretty bad artefacts whilst not drastically reducing file sizes after a certain threshold - ie image quality goes in the bin and you don't get much smaller files after a certain point.

and reducing the size of an image from a modern dslr of say 4000px longest side even to just half 2000px you're looking at reducing the total number of pixel data to store by a a quarter whilst still having a decent sized image that'd prob still be too big to view full size on anything but a retina display.

TLDR : resize to something reasonable for web use 1000 - 2000px longest side and save at about 70% will yield good quality images with a fast load time.

If the forum automatically resizes images to display at a certain width, then uploading at this size will save effort on the server side in processing them (php?) and also give you better looking images.



/back on topic