The web size is usually right around 300-500k, and I am OK with that. I know it is more bandwidth, but I have plenty to spare on my server, and I like the look of the bigger files. What is this ctrl-alt-shift-s thing? Dial up is soooo last century...
For B3, I set up from the top. There is a roof at the top that you can push off of to get out into space a little bit.
Alan Evil wrote:Wes, you should try ctrl+alt+shift+S for the pictures you're going to post. They'll still look great but they'll be like 60KB instead of 360KB. Just a suggestion to help the bandwidth challenged.
Just curious but did you rap in to hang to shoot that first set or did you climb out and anchor yourself in space?
Wes wrote:The web size is usually right around 300-500k, and I am OK with that. I know it is more bandwidth, but I have plenty to spare on my server, and I like the look of the bigger files. What is this ctrl-alt-shift-s thing? Dial up is soooo last century...
For B3, I set up from the top. There is a roof at the top that you can push off of to get out into space a little bit.
Alan Evil wrote:Wes, you should try ctrl+alt+shift+S for the pictures you're going to post. They'll still look great but they'll be like 60KB instead of 360KB. Just a suggestion to help the bandwidth challenged.
Just curious but did you rap in to hang to shoot that first set or did you climb out and anchor yourself in space?
Ctrl+alt+shift+S (this is in Photoshop, of course) saves a smaller version of a shot for the web. I usually shrink the picture to 800 or 600 pixels at the bigger measurement and then hit save for web. That way I can close the original without saving changes and keep it unaltered and then I've got a smaller picture to upload. If you choose the maximum quality setting in save for web it'll only be slightly smaller than a full resolution picture but if you choose moderate quality it can be significantly smaller and look pretty damned good. Here's an example. The first picture is 539kb at full resolution and the second is "save for web" at medium quality is 88kb:
It's worth fooling around with to allow your peoples that are still stuck in the last century for whatever reason to view these threads. Also, if you're ever asked to provide photos for a website, most people want them small in size but big on the screen.
Do you ever use a full body harness when you shoot? I'd think that might be more comfortable, especially if you're "standing" on the rock face above a climber. You could clip in to the loop on the back...
[size=75]You are as bad as Alan, and even he hits the mark sometimes. -charlie
"Not all conservatives are stupid, but most stupid people are conservative." - John Stuart Mill[/size]
1: You mean command rather then ctrl? I use a mac.
2: I almost never use photoshop these days. Aperture does all the editing/re-sizing/exporting I need. I only break out ps if I have to do some heavier work (like with layers, etc).
3: When I did use PS and did the save to web thing, the photos(esp. the colors) looked worse then full sized to a degree that I was not happy with the loss.
4: If the images are to big for a person, you can always use the "block all photos from www.knowchaos.com" in your browser.
5: Sometimes I think a chest harness would be nice, but I tend to move around and lean in different directions, so I think it might limit me too much.
1. I can't even figure out the mouse on a Mac. What's up with only one button? But yeah, it's the "save for web" that's under File.
2. I always use PS to prep pictures for viewing and printing. Maybe that's because every other program I've tried has felt extremely limiting or because I'm too lazy to try anything else.
3. There are certain things that will look like crap no matter what the settings are for "save to web." Sunsets and curved surfaces with fine color changes always come out with stripes, for instance. But most of the time it looks pretty good on a computer monitor, which is what web postings are all about. I keep the print copies on my HD or DVDs. But I'm kind of old school about uploading stuff to the web in that I try to make the file size as small as I can stand (I've also only got 700MB available to me with music files eating most of it). Like I said, it's worth playing around with.
4. I would think most everyone would want to see your pictures despite the slow loading time. It's just that once a page is really long those first thirty pictures that you've already seen load first. And even when they don't load first the size of the page keeps jumping as pictures above are loaded so you can't look at the new stuff until everything else is loaded. Of course I set my browser to refresh every time it loads a page because I'm sitting on a ton of bandwidth, but you get my point.
5. I'm not thinking of a chest harness but of the kind of harness used by construction people that combines the leg loops, waist loop, and chest harness. They have a big D ring in the middle of the back so that when facing down you could twist side to side or to pretty much any angle but laying on your back. They're far too heavy for climbing use but it would seem for climbing photography (most of the best shots are from above, it seems to me) that it might be the most comfortable. Then again, it's another expense, no?
Keep that shutter clicking.
[size=75]You are as bad as Alan, and even he hits the mark sometimes. -charlie
"Not all conservatives are stupid, but most stupid people are conservative." - John Stuart Mill[/size]
