Image Resolution

Ruu 8 years ago updated by Digby (Community Manager) 7 years ago 4

Since the main focus of the site is visual artwork, and the bog nice thumbnailspace lends itself rather nicely to browing, shouldn't the actual viewing of the picture be a bit more space efficient?

Perhaps it's the low resolution and jpg-yness of a lot of pictures, but going into "fullview" oftentimes looks kinda... well, bad.
Is there some iffy compression being tacked onto the actual artwork (not just icons/generated thumbnails) making it into this grainy jpg mess? Perhaps it should be revised slightly if so.

A lot of the time clicking to go into zoom/moveview won't alter the size of the image much - shouldn't it be fullres (or close) when in that mode, taking up the full space avaliable, if need to?


I have to say I draw in a cartoony style so these jpeg artifacts *really* show up in my images even without them being resized. It would be a lot better if images on the site were stored as png because those often take up less space than jpeg files and it would also keep the quality of the original image.


PNG can only be smaller for images with a limited palette, which is relatively rare. Clip-art and sketches are compressed nicely, but photos and detailed images in general are HUGE. JPEG is usually better for low-res images and thumbnails, but viewing full size and downloading should give original files, in whatever format they were uploaded. Artist's choice should be respected.

Makes sense.


We've had some significant changes to the site. At this point, clicking "download" on submissions will show you the original image without size or format changes. This will allow for quicker browsing while still having the image with the original quality on the site.