Edges of Converted Images are Warbled

[Dale Dreher]

When I shoot my location photos all day I come home with a bunch of pictures that are around 6-9mb each. These are too large and oversize that I end up Batch Converting them all at once using GC. I Resize to 768 Pixels High and then usually down to about 94% quality, which gives me a full set of now 500-750k or so pictures. The sizing is perfect but the quality is taking a hit. Particularly visible in the Straight White Lines in the photos as shown here: http://tinyurl.com/BAD-WHITE-EDGES There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGS What am I doing wrong? I am using a $1000. Canon Camera but then in the Batch Convert process my pics are getting ruined. I have seem 60k pics that look better than my 750k converted pics. Any ideas on better GC settings for this? Thanks so much. Dale Dreher Los Angeles, CA dale@hazardtown.com

[Richard Ball]

Have you tried taking the pictures at a size more closely approximating your desired size? Rich On May 29, 2012, at 10:10 PM, Dale Dreher wrote: > When I shoot my location photos all day I come home with a bunch of pictures that are around 6-9mb each. These are too large and oversize that I end up Batch Converting them all at once using GC. I Resize to 768 Pixels High and then usually down to about 94% quality, which gives me a full set of now 500-750k or so pictures. The sizing is perfect but the quality is taking a hit. > > Particularly visible in the Straight White Lines in the photos as shown here: http://tinyurl.com/BAD-WHITE-EDGES > > There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGS > > What am I doing wrong? I am using a $1000. Canon Camera but then in the Batch Convert process my pics are getting ruined. I have seem 60k pics that look better than my 750k converted pics. > > Any ideas on better GC settings for this? > > Thanks so much. > > Dale Dreher > Los Angeles, CA > dale@hazardtown.com > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > >

[Dale Dreher]

I can do that and will check into that.  But, did you take a look at my posted pictures, do you see the white line jagged edges I am speaking about?  Still wondering what causes that.  I didn't used to see that in the past, this is new since using my new camera.  But the problemed effect only happens after I Batch Convert. There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGSThank again.Dale.On May 29, 2012, at 7:15 PM, Richard Ball wrote:   Have you tried taking the pictures at a size more closely approximating your desired size? Rich On May 29, 2012, at 10:10 PM, Dale Dreher wrote: > When I shoot my location photos all day I come home with a bunch of pictures that are around 6-9mb each. These are too large and oversize that I end up Batch Converting them all at once using GC. I Resize to 768 Pixels High and then usually down to about 94% quality, which gives me a full set of now 500-750k or so pictures. The sizing is perfect but the quality is taking a hit. > > Particularly visible in the Straight White Lines in the photos as shown here: http://tinyurl.com/BAD-WHITE-EDGES > > There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGS > > What am I doing wrong? I am using a $1000. Canon Camera but then in the Batch Convert process my pics are getting ruined. I have seem 60k pics that look better than my 750k converted pics. > > Any ideas on better GC settings for this? > > Thanks so much. > > Dale Dreher > Los Angeles, CA > dale@hazardtown.com > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > >

[Alfred J Treder]

I think it has to do with your choice of correcting aliasing or not. It's a preference setting. I believe you DO want aliasing corrected. You are going for a low resolution product, which will show effects of pixelation when you view it near maximum size, since you have removed all hope of interpolation. Al Treder“ Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. ”-- Arthur C. Clarke On May 29, 2012, at 7:24 PM, Dale Dreher wrote:   I can do that and will check into that.  But, did you take a look at my posted pictures, do you see the white line jagged edges I am speaking about?  Still wondering what causes that.  I didn't used to see that in the past, this is new since using my new camera.  But the problemed effect only happens after I Batch Convert.There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGSThank again.Dale.On May 29, 2012, at 7:15 PM, Richard Ball wrote:   Have you tried taking the pictures at a size more closely approximating your desired size? Rich On May 29, 2012, at 10:10 PM, Dale Dreher wrote: > When I shoot my location photos all day I come home with a bunch of pictures that are around 6-9mb each. These are too large and oversize that I end up Batch Converting them all at once using GC. I Resize to 768 Pixels High and then usually down to about 94% quality, which gives me a full set of now 500-750k or so pictures. The sizing is perfect but the quality is taking a hit. > > Particularly visible in the Straight White Lines in the photos as shown here: http://tinyurl.com/BAD-WHITE-EDGES > > There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGS > > What am I doing wrong? I am using a $1000. Canon Camera but then in the Batch Convert process my pics are getting ruined. I have seem 60k pics that look better than my 750k converted pics. > > Any ideas on better GC settings for this? > > Thanks so much. > > Dale Dreher > Los Angeles, CA > dale@hazardtown.com > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > >

[Dale Dreher]

I will take a look at that.What about:Interpolation?  Yes or No?Dithering?  Yes or No?I don't know what these things mean, but need to know Yes or No?I will pay someone to take me through the proper settings to fix this issue.  If you know what I mean and can help, please do so.Everyday I shoot more pictures and need the correct settings for Batch Scaling and Resizing on GC.Thank you and Peace!direct email:    dale@hazardtown.comcell phone:     (310) 600-5020 Dale DreherLocation Scout & Managerdale@hazardtown.comwww.MaverickLocations.com On May 29, 2012, at 8:59 PM, Alfred J Treder wrote:   I think it has to do with your choice of correcting aliasing or not. It's a preference setting. I believe you DO want aliasing corrected. You are going for a low resolution product, which will show effects of pixelation when you view it near maximum size, since you have removed all hope of interpolation. Al Treder“ Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. ”-- Arthur C. Clarke On May 29, 2012, at 7:24 PM, Dale Dreher wrote:   I can do that and will check into that.  But, did you take a look at my posted pictures, do you see the white line jagged edges I am speaking about?  Still wondering what causes that.  I didn't used to see that in the past, this is new since using my new camera.  But the problemed effect only happens after I Batch Convert.There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGSThank again.Dale.On May 29, 2012, at 7:15 PM, Richard Ball wrote:   Have you tried taking the pictures at a size more closely approximating your desired size? Rich On May 29, 2012, at 10:10 PM, Dale Dreher wrote: > When I shoot my location photos all day I come home with a bunch of pictures that are around 6-9mb each. These are too large and oversize that I end up Batch Converting them all at once using GC. I Resize to 768 Pixels High and then usually down to about 94% quality, which gives me a full set of now 500-750k or so pictures. The sizing is perfect but the quality is taking a hit. > > Particularly visible in the Straight White Lines in the photos as shown here: http://tinyurl.com/BAD-WHITE-EDGES > > There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGS > > What am I doing wrong? I am using a $1000. Canon Camera but then in the Batch Convert process my pics are getting ruined. I have seem 60k pics that look better than my 750k converted pics. > > Any ideas on better GC settings for this? > > Thanks so much. > > Dale Dreher > Los Angeles, CA > dale@hazardtown.com > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > >

[Patrick Aquilla]

I get the best convert results using Best Interpolation in Scale and using Progressive (instead of Baseline) as the Codec under the options ... those 2 changes should fix that as I recall running into this years back On May 29, 2012, at 9:10 PM, Dale Dreher wrote:   When I shoot my location photos all day I come home with a bunch of pictures that are around 6-9mb each. These are too large and oversize that I end up Batch Converting them all at once using GC. I Resize to 768 Pixels High and then usually down to about 94% quality, which gives me a full set of now 500-750k or so pictures. The sizing is perfect but the quality is taking a hit. Particularly visible in the Straight White Lines in the photos as shown here: http://tinyurl.com/BAD-WHITE-EDGES There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGS What am I doing wrong? I am using a $1000. Canon Camera but then in the Batch Convert process my pics are getting ruined. I have seem 60k pics that look better than my 750k converted pics. Any ideas on better GC settings for this? Thanks so much. Dale Dreher Los Angeles, CA dale@hazardtown.com

[Patrick Aquilla]

oh and yes check Dither ... let me know how that works for you On May 29, 2012, at 11:38 PM, Patrick Aquilla wrote:   I get the best convert results using Best Interpolation in Scale and using Progressive (instead of Baseline) as the Codec under the options ... those 2 changes should fix that as I recall running into this years backOn May 29, 2012, at 9:10 PM, Dale Dreher wrote:   When I shoot my location photos all day I come home with a bunch of pictures that are around 6-9mb each. These are too large and oversize that I end up Batch Converting them all at once using GC. I Resize to 768 Pixels High and then usually down to about 94% quality, which gives me a full set of now 500-750k or so pictures. The sizing is perfect but the quality is taking a hit. Particularly visible in the Straight White Lines in the photos as shown here: http://tinyurl.com/BAD-WHITE-EDGES There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGS What am I doing wrong? I am using a $1000. Canon Camera but then in the Batch Convert process my pics are getting ruined. I have seem 60k pics that look better than my 750k converted pics. Any ideas on better GC settings for this? Thanks so much. Dale Dreher Los Angeles, CA dale@hazardtown.com

[thorstenlemke]

Hello,do you use the high quality interpolation?Thorsten On 30.05.2012, at 04:10, Dale Dreher wrote:   When I shoot my location photos all day I come home with a bunch of pictures that are around 6-9mb each. These are too large and oversize that I end up Batch Converting them all at once using GC. I Resize to 768 Pixels High and then usually down to about 94% quality, which gives me a full set of now 500-750k or so pictures. The sizing is perfect but the quality is taking a hit. Particularly visible in the Straight White Lines in the photos as shown here: http://tinyurl.com/BAD-WHITE-EDGES There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGS What am I doing wrong? I am using a $1000. Canon Camera but then in the Batch Convert process my pics are getting ruined. I have seem 60k pics that look better than my 750k converted pics. Any ideas on better GC settings for this? Thanks so much. Dale Dreher Los Angeles, CA dale@hazardtown.com

[Dale Dreher]

ok, I will start checking Dither from now on.  Care to tell me what the hell Dither means?  Lovingly, my friends, what does Dither mean?Is there a class I missed in college or in Photography 101, what is dither, for the rest of us?Thanks so much.I will check it, but can you teach a man to fish here?  Dither is: _______________________Thank you.  Please forgive my ignorance and I really do appreciate it. Dale DreherLocation Scout & Managerdale@hazardtown.comcell (310) 600-5020www.MaverickLocations.com On May 29, 2012, at 9:41 PM, Patrick Aquilla wrote:   oh and yes check Dither ... let me know how that works for youOn May 29, 2012, at 11:38 PM, Patrick Aquilla wrote:   I get the best convert results using Best Interpolation in Scale and using Progressive (instead of Baseline) as the Codec under the options ... those 2 changes should fix that as I recall running into this years backOn May 29, 2012, at 9:10 PM, Dale Dreher wrote:   When I shoot my location photos all day I come home with a bunch of pictures that are around 6-9mb each. These are too large and oversize that I end up Batch Converting them all at once using GC. I Resize to 768 Pixels High and then usually down to about 94% quality, which gives me a full set of now 500-750k or so pictures. The sizing is perfect but the quality is taking a hit. Particularly visible in the Straight White Lines in the photos as shown here: http://tinyurl.com/BAD-WHITE-EDGES There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGS What am I doing wrong? I am using a $1000. Canon Camera but then in the Batch Convert process my pics are getting ruined. I have seem 60k pics that look better than my 750k converted pics. Any ideas on better GC settings for this? Thanks so much. Dale Dreher Los Angeles, CA dale@hazardtown.com

[Alfred J Treder]

You DO want both dither and best interpolation, to correct aliasing. Dither is the term for rendering edges of features as NOT either/or for the choice of values for a pixel (at an edge), but somewhere in between the edge pixel value and the values of next-pixels away from the edge. It makes the edge pixels fade slightly into the background instead of their own little edges standing starkly against it. When you're short on pixels (and you ARE when you reduce resolution) you need every advantage to allow an analog (continuous) scene to look OK after digitizing it into discrete uniformly-sized pixels. You know, even with photographic film you are digitizing the continuous image from the lens into little silver grains in the emulsion, but they are usually so tiny you can't see them individually. Digital camera sensors have bigger grains (and are much more uniform) than photographic emulsion (with current technology). And then, to reduce the size of the digital file you are effectively making the grains much larger. You get some of the film effect of tiny grains next to larger grains by dithering and interpolating the uniform digital pixels. You would not want the dithering only if you have the edges in your image lined up with the edges of the pixels in your camera sensor, and want the sharpest possible presentation. Usually your image edges are a little off-angle relative to the rectangular arrangement of camera sensor pixels, and you will see a Moire pattern along those edges unless you soften the edges with dithering and interpolation. That's what you are calling wavy edges. Al“ When you come to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on.”-- Franklin D. Roosevelt  On May 29, 2012, at 11:25 PM, Dale Dreher wrote:   ok, I will start checking Dither from now on.  Care to tell me what the hell Dither means?  Lovingly, my friends, what does Dither mean?Is there a class I missed in college or in Photography 101, what is dither, for the rest of us?Thanks so much.I will check it, but can you teach a man to fish here?  Dither is: _______________________Thank you.  Please forgive my ignorance and I really do appreciate it. Dale DreherLocation Scout & Managerdale@hazardtown.comcell (310) 600-5020www.MaverickLocations.com On May 29, 2012, at 9:41 PM, Patrick Aquilla wrote:   oh and yes check Dither ... let me know how that works for youOn May 29, 2012, at 11:38 PM, Patrick Aquilla wrote:   I get the best convert results using Best Interpolation in Scale and using Progressive (instead of Baseline) as the Codec under the options ... those 2 changes should fix that as I recall running into this years backOn May 29, 2012, at 9:10 PM, Dale Dreher wrote:   When I shoot my location photos all day I come home with a bunch of pictures that are around 6-9mb each. These are too large and oversize that I end up Batch Converting them all at once using GC. I Resize to 768 Pixels High and then usually down to about 94% quality, which gives me a full set of now 500-750k or so pictures. The sizing is perfect but the quality is taking a hit. Particularly visible in the Straight White Lines in the photos as shown here: http://tinyurl.com/BAD-WHITE-EDGES There are my GC Batch Settings: http://tinyurl.com/GC-CONVERT-SETTINGS What am I doing wrong? I am using a $1000. Canon Camera but then in the Batch Convert process my pics are getting ruined. I have seem 60k pics that look better than my 750k converted pics. Any ideas on better GC settings for this? Thanks so much. Dale Dreher Los Angeles, CA dale@hazardtown.com