Image size on OTS - trying to avoid scaling

[Lara Images]

I'm really needing to know what is the NATIVE image size that OTS is looking for, because ANY re-sizing by the scaling engine on OTS results in horrible jaggies. I thought it was 500 pixels, but that's obviously not the case, because loading in my new avatar at 500px high still creates unacceptable edges.

C'mon, OTS. This is a site where I really want to display my best work for prospective clients, but you won't let me.
Look at my avatar to see what I'm talking about.

SO - what image size will NOT cause any re-scaling?

Really frustrated,

Paul

[Michael Bates]

Paul - don't be frustrated :eek:
I'll give a little history behind my reply: Many moons ago Andy S and I had a similar discussion about the "jiggies" on images. My workflow (and his) basically created web images at 640 pixels on the longest side. The OTS algorythm resized those images to 600 pixels on the longest side; thus, if I used unsharp mask or smart sharpen based on my workflow, the images looked oversharpened causing the "jiggy" appearance. I changed my workflow (as did Andy I believe) to make my web images 600 pixels (and sharpened accordingly) - voile` - no more jiggies.

If you are uploading a 500 pixel (longest side), the resize engine is going to upsize them to 600 pixels which is most likely causing your issue. Try a test image by setting it to 600 (letting the short side fall where it may) and see if that fixes it. The "container" for images is 600x600 - so if an image falls outside that box, it's going to be resized by the engine to make it fit.

The thumbnails have been recently resized to 120 pixels so that they all will be the same height in your profile (so you will see larger thumbs on any new images you upload). I hope this helps - but let me know how it goes.

I'm going to do a separate thread later today so that people can easily find the way to optimize their images for uploading.

Michael

[Lara Images]

I hope this helps - but let me know how it goes.


That did the trick, Michael, thank you. NOW I'm proud of my new shot with Ariel! :D

[Michael Bates]

YAY! I'm glad it worked for you. Ariel looks great!!!!

[photonewb]

I'm with Micheal...I was thinking for a while it was 640 and later found it was 600 on the longest side. Makes a lot of things easier as my "save for web" is no 600 on the longest side.

[RKEnnis]

This certainly helps. I'll probably delete and re-size the photos I've already uploaded to my portfolio - the scaling currently has them looking terrible!

I'm still a little confused, though. I'm seeing images posted in threads that are larger than 600px on the long size. These images display no apparent scaling. Are the rules different for images posted in threads? If so, why are the images I posted in the same thread being scaled?

thanks!

[photonewb]

Randy if you're hosting the images somewhere other than OTS, and using the script tags for inserting an image then they'll show up exactly as they are where they're hosted. The only time scaling and size restrictions comes into play is with the images in your OTS Portfolio which should be no bigger than 600 pixels on the longest side.

[RKEnnis]

Ok, it all makes sense to me now.

Thanks for the support!

[photonewb]

sounds like it's time to make an EDU for uploading images. There's 3 ways to do it, and they all have different restrictions...lol...it'll give me something to do later

[RKEnnis]

Yeah, the different forums all seem to have their quirks for getting the best results when posting images. Processing images to the right dimensions and file sizes to avoid re-scaling makes such a difference in the results.

An EDU on the subject would sure provide some value!

thanks again

[scruffkat2002]

I think this has always been a problem on alot of sites. I think it looks better now. We mostly know from testing what works and what doesn't.