Whole Nuther Country 6

tough question, I keep having the same problem. Just never sems sharp as the original.
Like your post, wish I could be there in person. Find the top a bit distracting, those branches. May be a crop would help.

I have ocassionally resized the text on a page accidentally without realizing the image had also changed. Other than that I can't help.

I'm really enjoying visiting the whole nuther country, Bill. I might be tempted to crop just a hair from the top. Wish I could help with your sharpness issue. It does look a little soft to me.

Bill you in a blue mood out there in a whole nuther country? Or you running with one track? Whatever, SWEET! Even if soft on screen, which knowing it is a posting issue helps me feel good about your capture.

Bill,

Looks like you are having a great spring down there. As to the softness, two theories. Compression happens when you save, but the image in memory remains unchanged. So unless you close the file and reopen the compressed file, you won't see the changes.

If that isn't it perhaps your ISP is at fault. Some services (mostly low-band width) compress files to reduce transmission times. In the past when traveling I accessed the Internet over my cell phone through Sprint. Images had noticeably worse quality. Also some browsers speed up internet access, but do so by reducing image quality. Read about Opera turbo
here.

Beautiful shot Bill. Love the blue and yellow and I'm also very partial to the cactus. I might crop down a little from the top though as Michael suggested. For my tastes the trees don't strengthen the image.

With regard to the display question? Here's what I suspect is happening. Your viewing the image from the site on your web browser. Most likely Internet Explorer if you're running Windows or Safari if you're on a MAC. Although you may be running some other browser - Firefox, Chrome... The web browser is converting the jpeg to something your screen driver can understand and display. My guess is that the browser doesn't do as good a job of interpreting and converting the file as photoshop does. My assumption is that when photoshop opens the jpeg it converts it to it's internal psd format and to do that, it has to make some optimizing assumptions about the jpeg format and your computer environment. Again, my guess is that PS is really good at that, better than your browser and probably better than any browser on the market. To test this, you could put together a web page with a link to your image path on your machine, open the page with your browser and see what the image looks like. (Sorry but I don't even remember the html to do this. I think it's pretty simple though, if you want to look it up.) The image should look like what you see when you look at the image file that's on the site. If it doesn't, then something is altering the image file on the site and I don't think that's too likely. Alternatively, you could get a copy of the file back from the site and open it in PS. It should look just like it did before you sent it. Just guesses on my part but I think they're likely correct. (smile) If you're interested in pursuing the test, let me know and I'll look up the HTML and send you a web page template you can browse.

Pat

Bill,

David made his response when I was writing mine. Also a possibility. The test would help you in making the determination. Also, a shorter way of making my point about this would be to compare the jpeg file to a musical score. Some musicians are going to do a better job of playing it and I suspect that PS is very very good compared to the browsers.

Pat

Great shot Bill. I wish that I could help you with your sharpness question. I love the profusion of blooms here. We are finally getting some warm weather, and I bought a bunch of flowers this weekend to start planting my planters.

Nathan

Pat, David, et al: Thanks for your suggestions and I think I may be getting to the bottom of the issue. I normally run Firefox primarily because it has an automatic spell check and I find some other features a bit more to my liking than Internet Explorer. I opened up the site in IE and the image looks much better on it. I put up the shot in PS at 100% and in both browsers. The most glaring difference was the physical size of the images on the screen. In IE and PS the image is the same size while in Firefox it is noticeably larger, washed out and soft. The effect in Firefox is like graphics on a balloon that lose intensity with inflation. I don't recall noticing this in the past and wonder if some of the recent updates to Firefox are the culprits. Thanks for your concern and input. >=))>

Bill, I am in camp supporting a bit of crop from the top, but a nice capture all the same.. It's good to know that you have been able to bottom out the sharpening issue.. Though I use IE, it's a nice learning bit as well.

Love the layers of color Bill, pretty country indeed. Good luck with your problem, never been able to figure it out.
John

Bill,

Nice series, I hope the lupine last until the prickly pear bloom I see buds all over the pads. Is that possible? Were setting up for some more rain here in So Cal, may be some will make as far as the whole nuther country. Where blue isn't just a state of mind.

Paul

Love the shot! Did you try the Willow city loop?