Is it Flickr degrading my posted images.

[Dave in Wales]

I fork out loads of £££££ on the best glass.

I shoot RAW.

I convert to JPG, resize and sharpen for posting.

The resized picture looks lovely....it ought to the time I've spent on it.

It's sharp and crisp...correctly exposed...WB is correct..detail in the shadows..no blown highlights etc. etc.

Then it all goes tits-up, I upload it to Flick and they take my beautiful image and kick it around the room for a while before they file it.

WHY DO I BOTHER, may as well just use the OOC JPG.

Posting our pictures on here and other forums, not necessarily photo based, is the only outlet that a lot of snappers have for displaying their work, apart from friends and family that is.

AM I DOING SOMETHING WRONG?...........or is there another way.

Is 500px worth considering?

The posted images from my iPhone are as good as those from my E-M1 + top quality glass.

 

[archstanton]

http://petapixel.com/2015/06/08/fli...-increased-compression-and-users-arent-happy/

They dropped the quality on images.

Not happy about it either, but I stopped using flickr a while back with that stupid moving image slideshow thing.
Maybe time to find a better image host?

 

[chris malcolm]

If you want to see all the detail in the original full size image you uploaded to Flickr without any questionable compression and downsizing why don't you use the Flickr option to look at that original untouched image?

 

[BillN_33]

spend a fiver(?) a month - get your own domain - and post the links direct from that - you then have control

 

[AdamSi]

I do wonder if some of it is people looking on iPads? I browse here 99% of the time and noticed the compression issue a few months back but when on Laptop I don't think I've seen the same issue (iPad never used to be so might be red herring)

 

[TheAndyA]

I have a feeling that Flickr will have many people viewing images on their mobiles, so I suppose they won't notice the change in image quality?

 

[Pookeyhead]

If you want to see all the detail in the original full size image you uploaded to Flickr without any questionable compression and downsizing why don't you use the Flickr option to look at that original untouched image?

This ^

As soon as you resize it, all that cash you spent on lenses goes out of the window any way. It's only Flickr.. don't worry. People can still see your images, and no one's interested in zooming in and pixel peeping. If they can see your work, then job done.

You can upload a full resolution image, and limit the general viewing size available... but still link to the original resolution.

(Give it a minute to download)

 

[chris malcolm]

An excellent cure to being over concerned about ultimate pixel peeping image quality is to take a lot of photographs of something for somr friends, like a party, a picnic, an adventure, or dare I say it, a wedding, and then show them ALL the shots and let them choose their favourites. Some of their top favourites will be shots so blurred by focus failures, camera shake, or whatever, that you'd be embarrassed to put your name to the photo. In fact it will sometimes be the blur that they like.

 

[ghoti]

If all you want to do with photographs is display them online then it is worth questioning whether you need to spend lots of money on top quality lenses.

As said above, as soon as you resize it for online viewing you've offloaded a lot of the advantages the expensive lenses have given you.

Unless you want to upload at full resolution for the benefit of tedious pixel-peeping gits.

 

[Pookeyhead]

If all you want to do with photographs is display them online then it is worth questioning whether you need to spend lots of money on top quality lenses.

As said above, as soon as you resize it for online viewing you've offloaded a lot of the advantages the expensive lenses have given you.

Unless you want to upload at full resolution for the benefit of tedious pixel-peeping gits.

This ^

No one expects quality online anyway. You get this in certain forums in here... people commenting on sharpness when it's a 1024 pixel image... WTF?? LOL

Do what I do. Upload at full resolution. Set your maximum viewing size to whatever you want. That way people can only view up to the size you set, but YOU can still link to a full resolution file.. just like I did a few posts back. You can still access the full res file, and no one else can.

If it's not looking perfect resized... who cares? Its' resized. Why spend all that cash on top quality lenses if you're only showing people resized, ow resolution versions any way? You can use any old crappy lens and make it look good at 1024 pixels across. Unless you print stuff.. who cares?