Jump to content

Rich in NEPA

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    441
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rich in NEPA

  1. quote:Originally posted by Lone Rangers: Any other countries need a cache? Umm ... no, but I sure wouldn't mind having my own country. Ooh-fa! ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  2. Nice work, IdahoFlyer! Cheers ... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  3. quote:Originally posted by DARC:Palette reduction means setting similar colors to the same. Converting an image to GIF and then to JPEG would be a poor-man's way of grossly doing this. CorelDraw's Photopaint has an image palatizer function that works great for me. Since more of the image data is the same after palette reduction, the JPEG compression algorithm generates smaller files. A real world example for me is a image that started out as a 409KB JPEG out of a digital camera and ended up being 52KB after palette reduction and saving as JPEG with 70% compression. The resulting image was as good as the original. DARC, I understand everything you are saying, but I still believe you are doing more harm to your images than good. I'd also like to suggest that you might want to take a closer look into these methods. I've experimented with many of them and have long since come to reject their value. When you reduce the number of colors in an image by either nearest color or error reduction processes, in effect you create "noise." In a heavily-textured subject you won't notice much of the negative effects from the noise, but it is readily apparent in even-toned subjects and smooth graduations. And when you save this image in JPEG format, the file size will usually be greater (believe it or not!) than the original image, given the same compression ratios. The irony is that the JPEG artifacts that are introduced can sometimes help to obscure this added noise, but if you were to scale up and compare the two images side-by-side, you would be appalled at their differences! I believe that this is why you are needing to use such high compression levels. At worse I hardly ever go beyond 25%, and typically use only 15-20% compression for my Web images. Another thing that's significant is to view your images with a calibrated high-accutance monitor, or an LCD display. Most consumer-grade CRT's have poorly focused electron beams, and their anti-reflection coatings further reduce sharpness. (I doubt many of us can afford a Barco Pre-press Reference monitor, but if you could seen one, you'd be impressed!) Most LCD's have no easy way to fine-tune their gamma and chroma settings, but they do provide exceptional sharpness. I'm just bringing these issues to the forefront because it's pretty easy to overlook the obvious. I had to endure a long learning curve in my switch to digital, and I'm still discovering new things. Cheers ... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  4. "Zen and the Art of Geocaching" -and- "The Tao of Geocaching" ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  5. quote:Originally posted by Ranger Rick: I don't know why, but when I rotate them and try resizing, the picture comes out a little grainy. RR, whenever you rotate JPEG images it's important to use a "lossless" transformation. Not all image editing software provides this feature. Check to be sure that the software you are using offers lossless rotation/mirroring operations. Cheers ... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  6. quote:Originally posted by exConn:Says Jeremy, by implementing a 100kb limit. Actually, he never said anything of the kind. I believe that you are merely assuming it. I'd be willing to bet that the 100KB limit was mostly arbitrary. You pick a number and see how it works out. quote:I was responding to your statement that the photo presented was not a good demonstration, when in fact, it was. I'm afraid that's a matter of opinion and standards. Obviously ours disagree. Cheers .... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  7. quote:Originally posted by exConn:Says Jeremy, by implementing a 100kb limit. Actually, he never said anything of the kind. I believe that you are merely assuming it. I'd be willing to bet that the 100KB limit was mostly arbitrary. You pick a number and see how it works out. quote:I was responding to your statement that the photo presented was not a good demonstration, when in fact, it was. I'm afraid that's a matter of opinion and standards. Obviously ours disagree. Cheers .... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  8. quote:Originally posted by DARC: The trick to getting small JPEG files is to minimize the amount of extrainious detail before you save them as JPEG. This means in order: saving the original image as TIFF, cropping, scalling, color palette reduction, and then saving as JPEG with 60% compression. DARC: I completely agree that it is often necessary and unavoidable to make trades-offs between image quality and file size. The JPEG format has a minimum 24-bit color depth (16.7 million colors) and changing the color pallete does little to reduce the file size--it just changes the colors available for display. Nor do I see the point to saving to TIFF unless I intend to re-edit the images. So exaclty how does this step affect the JPEG file size? When I'm editing an image, it's in the native format of the editor I'm using until I save it to some other specific format. Scaling changes the image dimensions and reduces detail--something that the original poster wished to avoid by asking for a increase in the upload limit. Finally, cropping is an aesthetic decision and may not be an option to the person composing the image, either in the camera or in an image editor. For those who aren't interested in looking at "museum-grade" images, or putting up with the increased download times, we are already provided with the thumbnails and scaled-image in the individual cache log views. No need for anyone to click on the images to view their full sizes if this isn't desired. I often look specifically for photos by certain cachers whom I've come to know as outstanding photograpers. I like to look at their full-size images, but that doesn't mean I want to print them and hang them on my wall! My monitor is quite capable of displaying a sharp, colorful and detailed image, and I'm willing to wait for the 20 or 30 seconds it takes to download over my "mere" 37Kb dial-up connection. If the upload file size limit were increased by 50%, that means I'd have to wait an additional 10 to 15 seconds for those images that take advantage of a new limit. Note that not all images posted will be this size, since even now not all images are 95-97KB maximum size. Cheers ... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  9. quote:Originally posted by exConn: This is _not_ photo.net or a place where you would grab photos to hang on your wall. Says who? Some of the people here take more pride in their photos (hence the original posters concerns, in case you didn't notice) than others do. Cheers ... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  10. quote:Originally posted by geospotter: You're also right about resolution, but that wasn't the question (or the challenge). It doesn't matter what camera/film you use when you display the results on a monitor. The monitor is the limiting factor. The question was about raising the upload file size limit so that people could post higher-quality images and/or larger size images. The "least common denominator" in PC video monitors is VGA (640x480) resolution. At that image size, you can't display a whole lot of image detail, but in many cases it is adequate. In addition, even VGA requires a good deal of compression to get its file size under 100KB. I have no problem with people keeping their images to VGA size or smaller because it accomodates everyone. Even though I my own display is Ultra-VGA (1280x1024) display, I still resize my images to VGA-size or smaller for posting to the Web. If others feel the need to post larger size images, it's fine with me, and may be quite necessary when greater detail is desired. Even a 2.1MP camera has much more resolution than necessary to fill my display! Cameras with higher resolutions are only needed for large prints, and are a pretty much a waste if you are only shooting for the Web. (I personally limit my 3.3MP camera to 8½"x11" prints.) Large prints are necessary if you want to exhibit greater richness, tonality, and detail, just as both a larger monitor and a high-resolution video card are necessary for greater image detail. My point is that even at VGA size, you still need to keep the JPEG compression levels as low as possible to avoid degrading the image, and at any given coompression ratio, the more detail in the image the larger the file size will be. The above examples are 300x300 pixel crops from four separate VGA images that were magnified by 200% and were saved at 1% (minimum), 9%, 15% and 30% compression ratios. The original file sizes were 197KB, 98KB, 67KB and 48KB respectively. As you can see, the JPEG artifacts get worse with increased compression. Even the 9% image, which just squeaks by the 100KB upload limit, is significantly affected. And note that these are not very detailed images. Cheers ... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  11. quote:Originally posted by geospotter: The image below is less than 100K (about 90K). ... Personally, I'd sharpen it more, boost the brightness, and lower the contrast, but it works for demonstration purposes. Actually, it doesn't work for demonstration purposes. Sharpen it and enhance the contrast, then try saving it at the same compression ratio you used for the first one and you'll see the increase in file size. The trouble is, the JPEG standard in use today is obsolete and not very good for highly detailed or textured subjects. If they ever release the new JPEG-2000 standards, this will improve the situation considerably. With digital photography you simply can't have your cake and eat it, too. Highly detailed images need higher resolution (that's why landscape photographers have always used ultra-fined grain films and large formats). As someone mentioned earlier, small image sizes and low-resolutions work fine for simple McToy photos and cache box close-ups, but not for landscapes or wooded/leaf-covered scenes. For a VGA-size image, 100K is barely accepetable for scenics and landscapes without suffering great loses of quality and JPEG artifacts. ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  12. quote:Originally posted by geospotter: The image below is less than 100K (about 90K). ... Personally, I'd sharpen it more, boost the brightness, and lower the contrast, but it works for demonstration purposes. Actually, it doesn't work for demonstration purposes. Sharpen it and enhance the contrast, then try saving it at the same compression ratio you used for the first one and you'll see the increase in file size. The trouble is, the JPEG standard in use today is obsolete and not very good for highly detailed or textured subjects. If they ever release the new JPEG-2000 standards, this will improve the situation considerably. With digital photography you simply can't have your cake and eat it, too. Highly detailed images need higher resolution (that's why landscape photographers have always used ultra-fined grain films and large formats). As someone mentioned earlier, small image sizes and low-resolutions work fine for simple McToy photos and cache box close-ups, but not for landscapes or wooded/leaf-covered scenes. For a VGA-size image, 100K is barely accepetable for scenics and landscapes without suffering great loses of quality and JPEG artifacts. ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  13. quote:Originally posted by Steak N Eggs: Is that you driving away from a cache I am going too? In northern California? I wish! What's your weather like right now? ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  14. quote:Originally posted by Steak N Eggs: Is that you driving away from a cache I am going too? In northern California? I wish! What's your weather like right now? ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  15. quote:Originally posted by clatmandu: candle wrapped in celophane, eh? Hee! That was one for the books. Jeremy eventually shut that one down, but I see that their second one isn't meeting with much success, either. The saga continues... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  16. quote:Originally posted by clatmandu: candle wrapped in celophane, eh? Hee! That was one for the books. Jeremy eventually shut that one down, but I see that their second one isn't meeting with much success, either. The saga continues... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  17. quote:Originally posted by MajBach: I'm still undecided!!! Any techies care to help?You can't have everything. Where would you put it? MajBach, why not keep it simple? Use high-quality alkalines for applications that require one-use throwaway cells (emergency flashlight, other long-term storage devices), and NiMH's for everything else (digital cameras, GPS, etc.). You can't go wrong with the Ray-o-Vac PS-4 system. I'd recommend getting the 12VDC car adapter so that you can take the charger with you on the road. Cheers ... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  18. quote:Originally posted by 300mag: What would you use? Have you tried using a “TexPen” by Mark_Tex Corp.? These are permanent, waterproof paints that write just like a ballpoint pen and come in many colors. I've used them successfully in outdoor environments, and they can be found in many art supply stores. Cheers ... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  19. quote:Originally posted by Prime Suspect: I carry extra pens, ziplock baggies, and a small notebook. I've replaced damaged bags and missing pens on numerous occasions, and provided a new logbook for a cache ... Fix what may be damaged or gone missing. Beyond that, it's really the cache owner's responsibility. PS, I'm with you 100% on this one. That's exactly what I carry along with my assortment of trade items, plus I bring 20' of duct-tape rolled up on a piece of plastic in a Zip-Loc snack bag. ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  20. quote:Originally posted by Prime Suspect: I carry extra pens, ziplock baggies, and a small notebook. I've replaced damaged bags and missing pens on numerous occasions, and provided a new logbook for a cache ... Fix what may be damaged or gone missing. Beyond that, it's really the cache owner's responsibility. PS, I'm with you 100% on this one. That's exactly what I carry along with my assortment of trade items, plus I bring 20' of duct-tape rolled up on a piece of plastic in a Zip-Loc snack bag. ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  21. What's with leaving matches, lighters and other highly flammable substances in caches? Is this the result of armchair adventurers watching too many Chuck Norris movies? These kinds of things are definitely NOT appropriate in parks, forests and similar recreation areas, particularly during drought seasons like we are currently experiencing! I have just read a few cache found logs where somebody is leaving bottle rockets as trade items. Uffda!!! ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  22. What's with leaving matches, lighters and other highly flammable substances in caches? Is this the result of armchair adventurers watching too many Chuck Norris movies? These kinds of things are definitely NOT appropriate in parks, forests and similar recreation areas, particularly during drought seasons like we are currently experiencing! I have just read a few cache found logs where somebody is leaving bottle rockets as trade items. Uffda!!! ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  23. quote:Originally posted by cache-potato:How do you leave a cache? Hmmm ... I wonder if the people who leave this kind of stuff will answer your poll honestly. All of this came from one cache during a maintenance visit, which didn't start out with any junk in it. ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  24. quote:Originally posted by cache-potato:How do you leave a cache? Hmmm ... I wonder if the people who leave this kind of stuff will answer your poll honestly. All of this came from one cache during a maintenance visit, which didn't start out with any junk in it. ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
  25. _ You'll know I'm there when you see this: Cheers ... ~Rich in NEPA~ === A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ===
×
×
  • Create New...