1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Picture Hosting Site

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by paradiddle, Jul 13, 2007.

  1. paradiddle


    Jun 1, 2007
    I currently host my pictures on Smugmug. I have noticed some others on this forum hosting on flickr and pbase. I was unhappy with the quality of how my pictures displayed. Grainy around eyes and edges. I even sent a message to Smugmug asking. That said everything was fine. So I noticed some others pictures that as they loaded seemed very crisp. I saw they were on pbase and flickr. I put one picture on flickr and to me it seems like better picture. Is this just my imagination? If not I will signup with another provider.


    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



    As you can see I don't know how to properly link to Flickr yet!
  2. jmmtn4aj


    Apr 12, 2007
    Maybe because of Flickr's resizing algorithm?
  3. paradiddle


    Jun 1, 2007
    Maybe what?
  4. bob swanson

    bob swanson Guest

    :cool: I've not had any problems with image quality on SM. They all appear as I produced them. Have you calibrated your monitor lately? www.bsvirginian.smugmug.com
  5. Takeda


    Jun 9, 2006
    Durham, NC
    I have noticed the same thing on Smugmug.....if I display the originals I uploaded, they are ok, but the other sizes are definately softer (especially when you use the slideshow option)
  6. It would be worth your while to sign up for a month (or use a free trial) and upload some test images and see what results you get from the different sites and choose whats looks best for you. I've found Smugmug is usually very good quality, but I also usually resize to 800, 1024, or 1280 pixels wide before uploading so the resizing isn't always a big factor.

    Earlier this year I did some nitpicky comparisons between Smugmug and Zenfolio awhile back and found some interesting differences. I didn't try pBase or Flickr. My first image can be a challenge to get a decent small image because of the red color, the multiple stripes, and details. In this case Smugmug is sharp and looks good, Zen is soft.

    Resized by me in photoshop from an 800px-wide image, 142k

    Resized by Smugmug, 68k
    Notice the slightly-more artifacting in the top of the front fender,
    but overall a good sharp image


    Resized by Zenfolio, 58k
    Notice how blurred the gold stripes are, usually that 'effect' is a result
    of lower-quality sub sampling.


    This Jag is just the reverse though. The solid red color has less artifacts and looks better from Zen than Smug. Red is tough in .jpg images and again I'm really nitpicking:

    Resized by Smugmug, 120k
    Notice artifacting around the wheel arch, fender, and behind the headlight
    chrome. To be fair there's usually not a lot that can be done about it except to
    lower the compression level, so it's a comprimise. There's more detail and it appears
    sharper to me than the Zenfolio one though. Smugmug resizes to 600px wide.


    Resized by Zenfolio, 145k
    No excessive artifacting and the 'sub sampling' problem doesn't detract from this image
    like it did in the previous one with the gold stripes.
    Zen resizes to 580px wide.

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.