File :-(, x, )
bibliophile
considering I was using a telephoto without tripod : /
>> elf_man
Kind of a nice abstract, but it doesn't really grab me.
>> Anonymous
PNG FAIL.
>> Anonymous
>>44932
Signed. Where the hell does this retardness come from?
>> bibliophile
>>44932
o god the file size is so hueg it must take you 1.5 seconds longer to load?!

seriously the file format fine so stop being an elitist faggot
>> Anonymous
>>44957

Kinda funny how you accuse them of being elitist when they're the ones shitting on a superior quality format. :|
>> bibliophile
>>44965
for most purposes for the web the jpeg is better, smaller, and faster

however for images where compression would rape the image PNG is better because it suffers less from compression. Considering many browsers compress images to fit whatever screen your using, png is better to use when your uploading images that reasonably could be compressed by your browser.

jpeg is also better to use when there is bandwidth issues, however that point is somewhat moot when you consider that this forum tends not to suffer from it.
>> Anonymous
What the fuck are we looking at? Macro shots are supposed to show the intricate details of something we generally overlook. The petal of a rose or the legs on a caterpillar for instance. This is a bunch of fucking ants.

Fail.

/signed.
>> thefamilyman
     File :-(, x)
in before elitist faggotry
i bump for JPEG on 4chan, not because of quality bla bla bla, but for good of 4chan as a whole, just look at the pic and you will see why. 4chan is not a fast website, and these 2MB+ images rape.
>> Anonymous !4X8vLLNDE2
its kind of nice... but scary at the same time.
>> ac
>>45066
You sound like every girlfriend I've ever had.
>> Anonymous
>>44997
Seconded. For a while, there was a time where most /p/osters would resize their pictures and have their EXIF data retained. Hi-res versions could be requested and posted later on. This is a good practice. I think we should continue it.

Personally, I think that opening a large file hurts the photograph if it has to be resampled by my browser and potential jaggies can occur. To remove them, I could view the full size, but then you can't really appreciate the photograph if it has to be seen piece-wise.

Smaller files, approx. 1000 pix on the longest edge, is best for OP and Anonymous. Everyone wins.
>> Niagareven
Format aside, one reason this looks a little strange is that the black isn't contrasted well against the white, there being so little of it.
>> Anonymous
>>45086
How does one resize pictures with EXIF data retained?
>> Anonymous
>>45445
Irfanview and Photoshop can do this. Irfanview retains the EXIF data with most any operation it does, however it's a Windows-only application. Photoshop has a save and save to web option. Save to web strips it of the EXIF data, but the regular save is fine.
>> elf_man
Everything that I've resized in GIMP has retained its exif data.
>> Anonymous
>>45456
I know about Photoshop's save-to-web, but how does one re-size with the normal save?
>> Anonymous
>>45459
open the file you want to resize and do everything in that window without copy pasting into a new file or anything then just save or save as and itll keep exif