A bit of help please

[V6GTO]

Which of these two images looks better on your screen?





Martin.

PS - I'll tell you why later...don't want to influance the outcome

[350wedge]

Both look to be pretty much the same to me tho bottom one seems a touch lighter, although that may be my budget work LCD which is rather cp

[Davi]

Very difficult to tell as I have to scroll up and down so cant compare side-by-side, but from sitting here working my scroll wheel like mad (colleagues looking at me oddly!) I'd say no. 1 has more depth of colour in the flower on my screen, bottom one looks ever so slightly washed out in comparison? I think

Have to ask, is that a cut out compilation? something looks a tad odd!

>> Edited by Davi on Wednesday 26th April 16:25

[pdV6]

Tricky to compare - had to open 2 browser windows and tile them!

On my (quite ancient) CRT, they do look very similar.
If I had to pick one, it might be the 1st. Couldn't really explain why, though.

[V6GTO]

Davi said:

Have to ask, is that a cut out compilation? something looks a tad odd!

No mate...it's unmolested except for a bit of Unsharp Mask and resizing for the interweb.

Martin.

[Davi]

Blimey - nice shot then! I dont think I've ever managed to get that short a DoF! Then again, I rarely get focus right period, I really am crap I'll have to stick one of mine up somewhen for a laugh.

Other than that - I cant say there is enough (if any) difference between them to notice, be interested to hear what the difference is!

[_VTEC_]

No difference whatsoever from what I can see.

[_dobbo_]

Only difference I can see is the top one has a tiny bit more compression artefacts going on around the green above the flower, but it's literally the tiniest bit.

I'm guessing the only difference is that the first one is a wee bit more compressed?

[Don]

No difference...

[tog]

The second one is darker and has greater colour saturation.

[te51cle]

2nd one looks better to me. The background looks slightly less bright and distracting and I see a little more detail in the petals of the poppy.

[Mrs Fish]

The first one looks slightly better to me, a touch more saturated, but there isn't an awful lot in it

[GetCarter]

No difference here (both crap)

Edited to say: Really nice pics - as Mrs Get said.

>> Edited by GetCarter on Wednesday 26th April 17:54

[speedychrissie]

i cant physically say what the difference is between the 2 pics, but i prefer the first. dont know why.

[TheStoat]

Well I'm squinting (see message icon) and I can't see any difference - can you calibrate an LG Flatron?

It doesn't help that depending on how far up or down the screen I scroll these two images they change saturation! Doh...

[D_Mike]

They look exactly the same to me.

[V6GTO]

Thanks for that. The difference is...

the first one is saved using the very fast "save for web" route and the second is "saved as" etc. I wanted to see if it was worth doing it the long way...obviously not!

Martin.

[angrys3owner]

Well on my monitor the first one looks better - I think, the shadows on the flower look darker.

[_dobbo_]

V6GTO said:

Thanks for that. The difference is... the first one is saved using the very fast "save for web" route and the second is "saved as" etc. I wanted to see if it was worth doing it the long way...obviously not! Martin.

Maybe not for that image, but the file size of the first is half that of the second - all that detail must have gone somewhere...

That said, for web use I guess it isn't that important

[Davi]

_dobbo_ said:

V6GTO said: Thanks for that. The difference is... the first one is saved using the very fast "save for web" route and the second is "saved as" etc. I wanted to see if it was worth doing it the long way...obviously not! Martin. Maybe not for that image, but the file size of the first is half that of the second - all that detail must have gone somewhere... That said, for web use I guess it isn't that important

Agreed - it's very image dependant - save for web gets rid of all references to unused colours, so if you have a low colour count then it will do pretty much an identical job but come up with a much smaller file - the only problem will come when you have a large colour range. Try the same thing with a image of many differing colours if you have one - if you dont compile something with most of the colour spectrum and lots of hues and tones.