Looking for design inspiration?   Browse our curated collections!

Return to Main Discussion Page
Discussion Quote Icon

Discussion

Main Menu | Search Discussions

Search Discussions
 
 

Nick Boren

9 Years Ago

Low Resolution After Uploading To Faa

I have noticed for some time now that after I upload images to FAA the resolution is a lot poorer than from the original image I posted from. Is anyone else having this issue? I have e-mailed tech support but they have said before that my images look fine on their end. I even went on a different computer to view my images and they are still looking not up to par with the original image. Can anyone shed some light on this issue? Thank You. If you want to see what I mean go view my last image of Bodie... see the checker board squares in the sky.. that is not on the original image I uploaded from. http://fineartamerica.com/featured/3-bodie-california-nick-boren.html

Reply Order

Post Reply
 

Heather Applegate

9 Years Ago

Never seen the checkerboard thing happen before. You don't have the green box enabled, so can't tell if its on the close up.

Have you tried re-uploading?

 

Mike Savad

9 Years Ago

i can't see up close, but that's a weird moire pattern you have there. nothing i can explain unless it's a file format, color space issue, but i can't see the close up so who knows.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

 

Nick Boren

9 Years Ago

Ok... I just clicked on the full resolution feature so people can see it at full res. It's an issue that really bothers me and it should not be happening. I have uploaded to other sites and have no issues like I have been having here. It has to be in the upload process somewhere I would think?

 

Kathy K McClellan

9 Years Ago

Nick,
I saw the checkerboard first thing (without the green box). When I used the green box it looks.....like a ton of noise or maybe more texture?

I looked at your first six images (the latest ones?) and this is the only one I see that has that checkerboard look. But it is very noticeable even without the green box.

Please keep us posted if you find out what the problem might be.

Kathy K. McClellan
http://keppenart.com

 

Earl Eells a

9 Years Ago

It Looks like may be you have a cloth texture on your picture with a real coarse weave. May be you accidentally hit a button for a fabric canvas finish.

 

Edward Fielding

9 Years Ago

I see it clearly on my Chromebook without even enlarging it.

 

Nick Boren

9 Years Ago

I used no texture on that image whatsoever. The file was not all that big.. I shot it in jpeg..maybe that has something to do with the pixelation? I am going to post it to flickr and see if I get the same results... I'm still thinking its an upload issue...

 

Nick Boren

9 Years Ago

I just uploaded the very same Bodie image to my Flickr site and I am not getting any pixelation of square box patterns in the sky like I am with it uploaded to FAA... There has to be an issue with the upload process here!

 

Jim Hughes

9 Years Ago

FAA applies compression and some degree of sharpening to the 900px preview images. I could, maybe, imagine that compression somehow interacting with noise in a photo to produce a regular pattern, but I've never seen it happen. I can't even imagine anything in an upload process that could introduce this. It's just a file transfer - FAA couldn't apply any processing to your full-size image because they need to store it exactly as received.

At 100% the image also looks over-sharpened, with very noticeable haloing. I see the quality in your other work, so I doubt that sort of sharpening would be your style.

JPG compression can produce a grid pattern, because the compression algorithm works on blocks. If this is that sort of artifacting, it suggests that this full-size image was somehow generated from a much smaller image.

So I'm puzzled. Can you post a link to the same image on Flickr?

 

Nick Boren

9 Years Ago

Yes Jim.. here is the link from flickr.. same image nothing changed. You will see the difference very quickly. Thanks for your input.. I appreciate it very much. There is a chance I might have over sharpened the Bodie image a bit.. but how come it's not having a problem when uploaded to Flickr.. it does not make much sense to me..

https://www.flickr.com/photos/cougars/16513220438/

 

I see it clearly. Don't know what it could be.

I have noticed that the High Resolution preview here on FAA and the uploaded image lacks the quality of my original file. It seems to have gotten worse the past 2 months. An out of focus touch to it. The High Resolution preview is also a bit larger than the 100 % preview that I use to review my work before uploading.

I have the same photograph from that spot taken in Bodie. Quite a place. Nice Black and White.

 

Colleen Kammerer

9 Years Ago

I agree with Jim, it looks like over-sharpening. Image looks better on Flicker, but when enlarged you can still see it a bit.

 

Jim Hughes

9 Years Ago

The image on Flickr doesn't have the grid, but there is some sort of artifacting clearly visible in the sky. It looks like jpg artifacting, not noise, but I'm not an expert. I don't know how that might get turned into the grid lines I see on FAA. But, it seems like something is not right in the original image. Maybe you're not uploading the file version you think you are?

Is this JPG an export from Lightroom? Sometimes I've goofed and created a JPG with old parameter settings. For example, maybe if you exported a full-size JPG with Lightroom set to "sharpen for screen", or low JPG quality, you could get something like this. I'm just guessing.












 

Looks to me like the photo has been changed in contrast and deepened. The artifacts in the sky could probably be dealt with by using a selective Gaussian blur to blend it in.

Was the image enlarged?

 

Nick Boren

9 Years Ago

Yes I did edit the Bodie image in lightroom.. but it still does not make sense that the flickr uploaded image looks so much better than the FAA uploaded version. Our images need to be looking there best .. especially when buyers come knocking.. I realize it is a jpeg but it should still look better than what it does.. flickr proves that!

I appreciate every ones input. Even when I am uploading images from the RAW format... they still don't look at good as they should.. they are never as good as the original file I am dealing with.

 

Jim Hughes

9 Years Ago

The Flickr image looks better, but still not right. Is it possible you have your export set for a very low-quality (highly compressed) JPG? Or was the camera set for low image quality and/or high sharpening? (Ouch, that would hurt).

I can't say that my images on FAA, at 100%, don't look like my originals, but then again I haven't checked that very much, and not lately. I'll take a look tomorrow.



 

I notice that my images almost always look better on some of the other sites that I am a part of. FAA images look clearer in the Activity area where graphs and somewhat useless stats are posted. I constantly go there to see my images that pass through just to see how the quality changes. I can't understand why the compressed images here change so much. I think any addition of the High Resolution Preview and Watermark Function adds to the problem. Have pondered turning them off.

 

Jim Hughes

9 Years Ago

I used to think that FAA's 900px previews were over-sharpened, but an image I recently uploaded looks soft in preview but ok at 100%, so I don't know - maybe they've changed.

 

Melissa Bittinger

9 Years Ago

As Heather asked two hours ago...have you tried re-uploading it here yet? Something could've gone wonky on the upload.

 

Nick Boren

9 Years Ago

I agree Glenn.. I can't understand it either.. but I think the people in the know here in FAA should look into it. To me image resolution is very important especially when one is trying to sell images, and this is a site for selling art.

I will admit that my original file of this Bodie image is not that big to start with.. but the checker board lines in the image should never be...

 

Nick Boren

9 Years Ago

No I did not try it.. but I will do it now and see what happens. Thanks for asking.

 

Jim Hughes

9 Years Ago

What are the image's pixel dimensions, and what is the output JPG's file size? That will tell the story on compression.

I think if an image was somewhat noisy to begin with - and was then over-sharpened without masking, amplifying the noise - on export to JPG that wasn't set for maximum quality, the compression algorithm might produce a lot of artifacting.

 

Nick Boren

9 Years Ago

The jpeg file size is 5.33 MB and the dimensions are 2950 x 2000... I re-uploading it like Heather suggested.. but it still looks the same.

I think I probably over sharpened it... I think that is the culprit on this particular image... But I still think the images should look better when uploaded to FAA! Some of my much larger files and capture in the RAW format are not looking near as sharp as they do on Flickr... I am still confused as to why this is! Anyone have any more input on this?

 

Melissa Bittinger

9 Years Ago

What colorspace is the file saved in - srgb, argb or cmyk? I don't know if I spelled all those or any of those right, lol! Anyway, which might it be, if you haven't answered that already? It does look oversharpened in the sky on flickr. You can go back in and denoise that in LR, use the brush on the sky.

 

Nick Boren

9 Years Ago

Obviously you know a lot more about lightroom than I Melissa.. I come from the old school of film photography so I have had to learn all this digital stuff as I go. :-) I am not sure what your talking about exactly.. but I think one of my major issues here is that I captured this image in jpeg and not RAW... making the resolution iffy right off the bat... However no one can explain to me why when posting to flickr the image is much better resolution however not perfect as you enlarge it more. There is pixelation there due to the size of the file. When uploading to FAA the overall image resolution is a lot poorer. My eyes are not what they used to be.. but even I can tell the difference. :-) Thanks for your input Melissa.. I appreciate it.

Yes over sharpening has come into play here.. I know this to be true.

 

Murray Bloom

9 Years Ago

Has the image been through a scanner at any point? I've had this happen with scanned B/W images processed in Photoshop and printed. The fix was to use a different printer utility, in this case, QuadTone RIP.

 

Nick Boren

9 Years Ago

No Murray this image has not been through a scanner at all. It is from the original file I worked up in lightroom.

 

Melissa Bittinger

9 Years Ago

I wouldn't get too excited about how much I know! I knew nothing about digital before joining FAA but I'm trying :o)

Shooting this in jpeg did not necessarily cause this issue. Plenty of photogs that are selling here only shoot jpeg. I would suggest seeing what the colorspace selected for this may have been, and look for a youtube on using the selective brush if you haven't played with it yet. I really think this issue may be how the file has been saved, either colorspace or export resolution or something. Go back through the history on this image in LR and 'export' it again to see what the info is and look through all the selections to check on exporting. Maybe this will help. CMYK files do not upload here well, but might on flickr...IF that is the problem. I don't know enough to tell you for sure though.

 

Nick Boren

9 Years Ago


So what file is best to upload to FAA if not a CMYK file.. I am relatively new to lightroom... I was previously using an older version of photoshop and in some ways liked it better. Maybe it's because I am still an armature with lightroom.. lol.. At least I admit it.. :-) It could be the way I am using lightroom too.. maybe I tend to over sharpen images.. I have no idea. In some ways film photography was so much less compicated.. but a lot more costly.. lol :-)

 

Abbie Shores

9 Years Ago

Never load CMYK or ProPhoto. We only work with AdobeRGB or sRGB.

 

Jim Hughes

9 Years Ago

Nick, remember that if you edit a JPG with Lightroom, and then export the result, you create a new JPG. So now that image has been compressed twice. You said you usually shoot raw files and that's the way to go. I question what your camera settings for size and quality might have been when you took this one as a JPG - because I think what's visible in the sky, on both FAA and Flickr, is heavy JPG compression artifacting. Somehow you ended up working with a JPG that was heavily compressed, i.e. a low 'quality' number selected, either in the camera or on Lightroom export. And it was downhill from there.

Focusing on the difference between FAA and Flickr won't be productive, because the image is 'off' on both. You need to find the root cause. Are you sure the rest of your FAA portfolio is 'clean' at 100%?

 

Nancy Wilt

9 Years Ago

I am having the same problem with an image that I just uploaded. I tried uploading it 4 more times, varying different ways of saving it, and the FAA is very much lower in resolution from my original .jpg - any tips are appreciated.

 

Jim Hughes

9 Years Ago

Which image?

 

Nancy Wilt

9 Years Ago

Hi Jim Hughes. I've posted 5 different versions (replacing each) and am having a degradation on image resolution. The image is a Paris scene of Notre-Dame that I shot the image in raw Nikon format and edited it in Photoshop. I'm new to FAA. I'll try uploading it into my Flickr site to see if it's the image or FAA compression of some sort.

I just posted 4 of the versions of the same image (saved in slightly different ways from Photoshop) onto my Flickr and the resolution looks perfect/as expected on each of them there. I'm unsure why the same images have lower res when uploaded to FAA. Will keep experimenting and provide feedback if I resolve my issue. Thanks for any other insight.

 

Gregory Scott

9 Years Ago

Here's the key: focus on just three sets of images. The image you upload, and the images seen on FAA, and the images printed by FAA.
FAA prints exactly what you upload, with no degradation. Your upload IS what is printed.. Assuming you use a correct color space, you should have no problem. Use aRGB or sRGB. (That's another conversation.)

In between are the FAA/Pixels/AW/etc display images. They are always lower resolution and/or compressed versions of your "original upload" image, and thus of lower quality.
If you think you are seeing a degraded image here, you are probably right. However, not to worry. What will be printed is not what you see, it is what you uploaded.

 

Nancy Wilt

9 Years Ago

Thanks very much Gregory Scott. That makes complete sense as to what is happening with my image. However, I'm not sure I would purchase the image if the lower quality one was the only one seen.

 

Jeffery Johnson

9 Years Ago

Gregory so all the bad images on FAA aren't actually bad it is because FAA makes them look bad?

 

Alexandra Till

9 Years Ago


.....If you think you are seeing a degraded image here, you are probably right. However, not to worry. What will be printed is not what you see, it is what you uploaded.

Huh? How does a visitor willing to buy know that?

 

Mike Savad

9 Years Ago

Photography Prints
is it this one? because it's really noisy, and the site doesn't do that. the noise comes from iso, or some kind of enhancement, oddly though, another person with a nikon, shooting raw, also had this same look, some haloing and noisy skies. hard to say if its the camera or the conversion, or what. but the site won't make noise, it may sharpen it though.

Art Prints
is this film?


---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

 

Gregory Scott

9 Years Ago

They don't. That's one of the unfortunate realities of internet sales. It's necessary to prevent screen-scraping image theft. I have ALWAYS seen compression artifacts in the green box full resolution loupe view. Since the boxes which can be viewed leave gaps which cannot be stitched back together,, I would like to see less compression on that view. Note that the full resolution view (so called) may not always be full resolution, either. There are old threads where I have detailed these issues in (excessive?) detail. But it's always been considered a theft-proofing bug, rather than a defect.

 

Gregory Scott

9 Years Ago

Jeffrey:
Not all. Frankly, there are a lot of bad images uploaded. So it's essential to compare what you are seeing in the file you actually upload, and compare that to what is displayed on FAA. But what you upload will be printed "as is" with no compression, no additional sharpening, etc.

 

Jim Hughes

9 Years Ago

@Nancy Wilt, Mike is correct, you'll have to reduce the noise, and the sharpening, in those images. They are good photos but won't be accepted for printing as they are now.

 

Nancy Wilt

9 Years Ago

Thanks for all of your comments and suggestions. I'm fairly certain I've over edited the images and now understand some of the issues. The photo of Central Park, yes, Mike, was shot using film.

 

This discussion is closed.