How does one get the very best image quality on Purpleport? I am Totally confused!

Thanks for all the advice ..

I do notice some think its 900 wide and some think its 900 on the longest length.

I think it must be 900 px wide, after a litttle research

A portrait image uploaded with width 900 height 1350 is displayed with the same dimensions.

A landscape image uploaded with width > 900 is being displayed with width 900 height 598, so I am assuming it has been resized.

In a world dominated by widescreen monitors, PP is a still an old style vertical website.  Size your images to 900px wide and apply output sharpening or they will get re-sized by whatever random algorithm is used on upload, and soften the edges slightly.  Purpleport is actually not that bad compared to the mangling Facebook gives your images if you are not careful about what you feed it, but even so, it's good practice to size output image files for the intended use (view or print).   You will never trouble the 2MB limit even at maximum jpeg quality.   Lightroom will do this for you on export (just create an export preset for Purpleport).

Incidentally, it's also a good idea to limit the height of vertical images to around 1024px - or they won't fit on most screens.

I just uploaded a landscape image with witdh 1350 px and height 900 px, and it was resized to 900 x 600.

i4E said

I created a PurplePort export setting in LightRoom - has saved me hours of time. 900px wide and sharpening boosted a touch

Now that's a great tip for someone new like me😀

I apload 1000X2000 and pp resizes it automatically..

Pixels does not always mean quality. I just use what I have always used 833x555 or 555x833 and I would imagine everyone hopefully sees the quality with no problem. 

I just export with a max file size of 2000k and let PP do the rest... Never had a problem

The general consensus is the limiting factor is 900 wide, be it Landscape or Portrait.

I did ask admin, as the replies here had inconsistent views. Their answer was basically anything wider than 900 wide would be resized. They didn't answer if in Potrait mode, if it was 900 wide and therefore 1350 high; as 1350 was greater than their 900 limit would there be any degredation due to their compression engine.

So I replied and asked them to be specific. Awaiting the answer.

I am not being pedandic here, until now I was resizing down to 1.99 MB in a vain attempt to deliver the best image quality possible. Its a pain doing it this way, as one has to guess the nearest pixel width in DPP4.3 and it might come out as 1.99 MB in DPP4.3 but refuse to load in Purpleport; as it says its say 2.01MB.

I was also puzzled that my small images looked good on my 17" monitor or the new iPad Air II, but when I looked at them on Purpleport they looked crap, a bit fuzzy and lacked the POP on the skin tones. So it seemed reduction in DPP4.3 really didnt hurt the image too much looking at it on my devices, but Purpleports reducer/compression engine significantly degraded the image.

Having placed an advance order for the 5DS R, 50 MPS, I thought I'd look into it. 

My conclusion so far, but needs verification by a field test comparison and the reply due from Admin. ; is if my software reduces the image to 900 wide it will look better than if Purpleports system resizes it, and of course the limit seems to be 900 wide - but just on the width.

Sadly that means on the web my pictures taken by the 5D3 and soon to be the 5DS R will look no better than those taken with my Old 7D, and likewise the lens upgrade from a 70-300L to the 70-200F2.8 L II will also not be reflected in a better IQ. 

Well thats a leveller eh, but I suppose its a model website,  not a photographic technical forum.

The good news is my workflow is easier just set DPP4 to 900 wide and thank you. (As it would never hit 2 MB)

regards

Peter

And many thanks for all the replies especially those who did some tests - much appreciated.

Digitalelegance said

 

...Having placed an advance order for the 5DS R, 50 MPS, I thought I'd look into it...                                   ...Sadly that means on the web my pictures taken by the 5D3 and soon to be the 5DS R will look no better than those taken with my Old 7D, and likewise the lens upgrade from a 70-300L to the 70-200F2.8 L II will also not be reflected in a better IQ. 

Save yer money. I'll flog you my 450D and kit zoom for a fraction of the price. It will solve your problems at once. 

Orson Carter said

Digitalelegance said

 

...Having placed an advance order for the 5DS R, 50 MPS, I thought I'd look into it...                                   ...Sadly that means on the web my pictures taken by the 5D3 and soon to be the 5DS R will look no better than those taken with my Old 7D, and likewise the lens upgrade from a 70-300L to the 70-200F2.8 L II will also not be reflected in a better IQ. 

Save yer money. I'll flog you my 450D and kit zoom for a fraction of the price. It will solve your problems at once. 

Ah If it came with your Talent built in, I would swap with you. :) :).  But some of us need any help we can get ;)

I may cancel that order, as there seem to be so many negative issues with such a densly populated sensor (pixels are too small)  So it sounds like it might not be the ultimate solution after all. :-/

... and just stick with my trusty 5D3, at least it works every time. :) 

Digitalelegance said

Ah If it came with your Talent built in, I would swap with you. :) :).  But some of us need any help we can get ;)

I may cancel that order, as there seem to be so many negative issues with such a densly populated sensor (pixels are too small)  So it sounds like it might not be the ultimate solution after all. :-/

... and just stick with my trusty 5D3, at least it works every time. :) 

 

On a side note, do you ever print your images? My belief is that anything over and above 10mp is wasted on web size images, even my EM5 at 16mp can print superb 24" x 36" images

And let's not lose sight of the fact that both the browser and the monitor are going to do their best to mess around with what you upload anyway... anyone who has fought safari vs chrome colour profiling will know what I mean! The most common monitor resolution is currently 1366x768, which is going to be mostly laptops not retina studio displays, so that extra 2% isn't going to make much difference most of the time. That's the tech, not PP!

PhilGW said

Digitalelegance said

Ah If it came with your Talent built in, I would swap with you. :) :).  But some of us need any help we can get ;)

I may cancel that order, as there seem to be so many negative issues with such a densly populated sensor (pixels are too small)  So it sounds like it might not be the ultimate solution after all. :-/

... and just stick with my trusty 5D3, at least it works every time. :) 

 

On a side note, do you ever print your images? My belief is that anything over and above 10mp is wasted on web size images, even my EM5 at 16mp can print superb 24" x 36" images

I dont but sell image through a company that prints the images on various materials from brushed steel, chome steel and silk screens up to 60" x 45".

once by accident I sent them a 3MB image and they said the IQ might be questionable; so I then sent them a 16MB version and they confirmed it would be excellent, and the end customer paid!

Hence I always save the biggest edit in DPP or Photoshop ( used to clear up any perfipheral clutter , say an arm of a sofa if its a home shoot at a models house. And I need to use Portraiture which is a pluggin for Photoshop ) And then make a small version for web stuff.