What am I Seeing?

[Tim Smith]

I've been doing a lot of surfing, looking at portfolios by excellent photographers from this forum and elsewhere. The digital revolution is impressive and the imagery is remarkable from every standpoint.

I have noticed though, a certain quality that seems to be almost universal. It will be hard for me to describe, but my question boils down to this: is the process of making reasonably-sized images for internet-gallery use compromising the quality of the images i see online? Would a well-made print of the same image have more "depth" and dynamic range?

I don't have the opportunity to see, in person, prints produced from the best digital cameras. Most of the images I'm looking at online seem a bit two-dimensional. The edges seem a little too sharp. The shadows don't draw me in the way they did when viewing a well-made print on silver-based paper.

I'm trying to describe something intangible I think (and maybe not succeeding). It's a sense of being drawn further into an image vs. reacting initially to an image but not being mesmerized by it.

Is this just the "online factor" or is it typical of the image quality of digital vs. film?

Thanks for your patience.

[Terry Zorich]

So you're saying that images you're viewing on your computer monitor seem different somehow than silver halide prints you've held in your hand.

Interesting.

Seriously, they are quite different. I can assure you that when you make prints from good digital image files, they are quite excellent, and probably indistinguishable from prints from negatives.

If you mean the online galleries like photoreflect, pictage and even here. Then absolutely, yes. There is a huge difference between the print and the file you see online.

The online galleries compress the image (meaning they throw away a lot of the image information). This is done for the sake of bandwidth and small screen sizes, etc. In addition, when viewing online the color space is compressed. There is no single sure fire way to compensate for this as everyone is viewing on a different caliber and make of monitor all of which have different display charactersitics. In an attempt to make the files look less washed out and to retain a little detail these gallery programs often automatically add a lot of sharpening, boost the contrast and the saturation. This probably explains the "sharp edges" you're seeing.

One thing our galleries offer that most don't is the ability to upload and view the full-res file. This still doesn't give you a very realistic view of what it would look like on a print because a 1:1 ratio viewing on a screen is much too close. Still, it is better than nothing. In Photoshop if I want a quick estimate of what a page might look like as a print I can usually view at about 50% to get an idea of what might resolve into an 8x10 or 13x19 print.

This is the dilemma that confronts many of us daily. We often present the files online for ease of viewing, time savings (for both the client and the photographer), and expediency. But, we know that if we could get some nice 16x20 or 8x10 prints in front of them in person they would snap it up in a minute. This is not a realistic option for many in the fast paced mobile society we live in today.

[Tim Smith]

Originally Posted by Terry Zorich

So you're saying that images you're viewing on your computer monitor seem different somehow than silver halide prints you've held in your hand.

Interesting.

I know how that sounds, but honestly, the last photographic prints I've seen were the "old" style, i.e., film to paper. My current profession (Graphic Designer) has me strapped to the computer and nearly 100% of the things I see (apart from TV) come thru my Sony Artisan monitor. I had the feeling that an actual print from a quality printer would be better than the jpegs seen in galleries online, but wanted to get a confirmation.

Clearly, I need to get out more...

[DonLashier]

Surf shots are particularly difficult to adjust because of the typical "double hump" nature of the histogram. If taken on a hazy or overcast day simply upping the contrast slider will not have the intended affect - in fact probably the opposite, flattening the water (dark) and foam/sky (light). Example Example 3 - Lashier Photography

But the comment about some images not working well at small/web sizes is also valid.

- DL