OK from the test in my post above:
-In all cases the website resizes the images.
-If the uploaded image is smaller than the width of the web page it is resized apparently based on the monitor being used
-If the uploaded image is larger than 1800px wide it gets downsized to 1800px and then gets downsized again to fit the page depending on monitor being used
-If an image larger than 1800px is linked rather than downloaded it gets downsized to fit the page depending on monitor being used. NOTE: This produced the sharpest image because downsizing is only done once.
- 1200px upload is definitely soft
- linked image (3200x2133px) looks as sharp as when viewed in LR
- the other two lie in between and look about the same to me. They were both resized to 1800x1200 from 1920 and 3200(long side) respectively.
-In all cases the website resizes the images.
-If the uploaded image is smaller than the width of the web page it is resized apparently based on the monitor being used
-If the uploaded image is larger than 1800px wide it gets downsized to 1800px and then gets downsized again to fit the page depending on monitor being used
-If an image larger than 1800px is linked rather than downloaded it gets downsized to fit the page depending on monitor being used. NOTE: This produced the sharpest image because downsizing is only done once.
On my Windows 11 laptop using Chrome browser on 2560x1600 monitor:@NorthernFocus Dan what do you see from your experiment. Seems to me the 2MB is better than the dimension resizing and the linked better yet?
- 1200px upload is definitely soft
- linked image (3200x2133px) looks as sharp as when viewed in LR
- the other two lie in between and look about the same to me. They were both resized to 1800x1200 from 1920 and 3200(long side) respectively.
Last edited: