Which site for embedding photos in this site?

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by sgreszcz, Mar 11, 2015.

  1. sgreszcz

    sgreszcz Mu-43 Veteran

    439
    Oct 7, 2012
    I was writing a post and trying to embed photos from Flickr into this site at 800px. The results looked horrible with lots of artifacts.

    Does anyone have any suggestions how to post here, embedded or otherwise with the best image quality possible?

    Thank you!
     
  2. jziegler

    jziegler Mu-43 Veteran

    261
    Dec 15, 2012
    Salem County, New Jersey
    James
    Smugmug is always a good choice for such things (image quality is a big focus for them), but there is a yearly fee for membership there. I've been with them for years, and gladly pay the fee for the service they provide, but I know some people only want to use free sites. I can't give any information for anything free.
     
  3. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    @sgreszcz@sgreszcz Flickr is actually a good choice, but you have to upload to Flickr at either a substantially higher resolution than you intend to embed, or you have to upload at the same resolution you intend to embed.

    Examples:

    -Upload to Flickr at full res (16MP), embed on this site at 1024px - great results

    -Upload to Flickr at 1024px, embed on this site at 1024px - great results

    -Upload to Flickr at 1300px, embed on this site at 1024px - poor results.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Another good option is to upload straight to the thread using our forum software. It can easily handle full-res images and resizes them while maintaining high quality.
     
  5. Brian Beezley

    Brian Beezley Mu-43 All-Pro

    Really? Why is that? All my images on Flickr are at 1600px. I see no problem when I embed here at 1024px.

    Brian
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2015
  6. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Flickr automatically applies sharpening when resizing in order to combat the softening that the resizing process imparts.

    If you sharpen a 16MP file such that it looks optimal viewing at 100% on screen and use Flickr to downsize to 1024px, Flickr will downsize to 1024px, which induces a lot of softening (big change in size) and then automatically sharpens the result to look good.

    If you upload an unsharpened or very lightly sharpened 1300px file to Flickr and use Flickr to downsize to 1024px, Flickr will downsize to 1024px which induces very little additional softening (small change in size) and then automatically sharpens the result to look good.

    If you upload a well sharpened image at 1300px and then use Flickr to downsize to 1024px, very little softening will be induced by the minor resize, and the additional sharpening Flickr does to account for resizing results in an oversharpened final product.

    All of this is subjective and only represents my impression of what Flickr does and the resulting image quality. What I see as oversharpened, someone else may see as just right.
     
  7. Brian Beezley

    Brian Beezley Mu-43 All-Pro

    OK, I understand what you're getting at. Flickr does seem to oversharpen everything, but not grossly so. It's not bad enough to bother me. I never see sharpening halos, for example, but sometimes an image can look unrealistically crispy. Incidentally, I upload everything to Flickr at 1600px because anything less displays there at 1024px maximum, which is a bit small for the largest possible image.

    The only problem I have is that once you embed a Flickr image here, you can't update it on Flickr without losing the link. For example, I'm about to delete the test image in my message above because I don't want it on Flickr. But that will yield an unseemly box and error message here. I don't always remember that I've linked to an image that I happen to update a long time later.

    Brian
     
  8. Jfrader

    Jfrader Guest

    +1. SM has a link embedding feature that works well for all the forums I use, even the ones that are notoriously tricky to post to.
     
  9. budeny

    budeny Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 4, 2014
    Boulder, CO
    @jziegler@jziegler, @Jfrader@Jfrader - I'm on SM too and since some time in 2013, the resized versions on SM are missing some essential EXIF info - ISO, f-number, exposure compensation, etc.
    I wonder if you've noticed same issues?

    Don't want to hijack the thread, so shoot me PM (aka "conversation") please!
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2015
  10. Jfrader

    Jfrader Guest

    I can answer quickly without taking things too far OT. Yes, I've noticed but it doesn't bother me. For several of my forums I prefer not to include EXIF anyway.
     
  11. sgreszcz

    sgreszcz Mu-43 Veteran

    439
    Oct 7, 2012
    Thanks Amin, I was uploading at full resolution, then embedding at 800px which made them look real bad. I was assuming that there was OK compression being done from the high resolution image similar to how Youtube offers several streaming resolutions. I was selecting the 800px embed code from Flickr, but it does look real bad.
     
  12. TNcasual

    TNcasual Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 2, 2014
    Knoxville, TN
    I think many of us use Flickr and embed with the BBcode option at 1024. It works well enough for me. I tend to manually remove the Flickr user link. I mean, the image is linked, why do I need my username with a link as well?
     
  13. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Bad in what way? Oversharpened? Colors? Can you post an example?