How can I create an OPTIMIZED web gallery?

"Dale Glaser" wrote in message

I can make a photo gallery for the web, but it doesn’t SEEM like I am getting optimized (ie, Save for Web) versions of the images.

Yes, you’re getting "optimized" (that is, compressed) images, although they are compressed via "Save As" rather than "Save for Web". Look under the options for Large Images for the compression options.

Is there
a way to do this? Or do I need to create an action first that runs Save for Web on a folder before automating them into a web gallery.

That would just degrade the images due to repeated JPEG compression. What you could do is run Web Photo Gallery first, then use File>Automate> Batch to run an action that replaces all the images created by Web Photo Gallery. This is hardly worth the bother to save a couple K per image, but the real advantage is that you can sharpen the images after resizing them.

I run a droplet first to resize, auto-levels and unsharp mask. Then in Web Photo Gallery I untick "resize".

Brian

"Dale Glaser" wrote in message

Hi,

I can make a photo gallery for the web, but it doesn’t SEEM like I am getting optimized (ie, Save for Web) versions of the images. Is there a way to do this? Or do I need to create an action first that runs Save for Web on a folder before automating them into a web gallery.
Thanks, Dale

In article <9JlVb.10849$>,
"Warren Sarle" wrote:

"Dale Glaser" wrote in message

I can make a photo gallery for the web, but it doesn’t SEEM like I am getting optimized (ie, Save for Web) versions of the images.

Is there
a way to do this? Or do I need to create an action first that runs Save for Web on a folder before automating them into a web gallery.

That would just degrade the images due to repeated JPEG compression.

That’s not true (repeated compression) as long as you make certain to _not_ check the "resize images" box–as mentioned in Brian K’s response to this thread.

Phil

—
Phil

Phil Rose wrote in news:pjrose-
:

In article <9JlVb.10849$>,
"Warren Sarle" wrote:

"Dale Glaser" wrote in message

I can make a photo gallery for the web, but it doesn’t SEEM like I am getting optimized (ie, Save for Web) versions of the images.

Is there
a way to do this? Or do I need to create an action first that runs Save for Web on a folder before automating them into a web gallery.

That would just degrade the images due to repeated JPEG compression.

That’s not true (repeated compression) as long as you make certain to _not_ check the "resize images" box–as mentioned in Brian K’s response to this thread.

It was the last I checked. PS still opens and re-saves the images.

You can, of course, keep a clean copy of the directory.

On 2004-02-29 09:26:45 -0500, Eric Gill said:

Phil Rose wrote in news:pjrose-
:

In article <9JlVb.10849$>,
"Warren Sarle" wrote:

"Dale Glaser" wrote in message

I can make a photo gallery for the web, but it doesn’t SEEM like I am getting optimized (ie, Save for Web) versions of the images.

Is there
a way to do this? Or do I need to create an action first that runs Save for Web on a folder before automating them into a web gallery.

That would just degrade the images due to repeated JPEG compression.

That’s not true (repeated compression) as long as you make certain to _not_ check the "resize images" box–as mentioned in Brian K’s response to this thread.

It was the last I checked. PS still opens and re-saves the images.
You can, of course, keep a clean copy of the directory.

So PS re-saves the jpegs without any input concerning the quality level? Hmmm, are you sure? Even if PS actually does open and re-save, this would not result in significant image degradation if jpeg files are merely resaved (i.e., without any changes).

Phil

Phil Rose wrote in
news:2004022919144878552%:

On 2004-02-29 09:26:45 -0500, Eric Gill said:

Phil Rose wrote in news:pjrose-
:

In article <9JlVb.10849$>,
"Warren Sarle" wrote:

"Dale Glaser" wrote in message

I can make a photo gallery for the web, but it doesn’t SEEM like I am getting optimized (ie, Save for Web) versions of the images.

Is there
a way to do this? Or do I need to create an action first that runs Save for Web on a folder before automating them into a web gallery.

That would just degrade the images due to repeated JPEG
compression.

That’s not true (repeated compression) as long as you make certain to _not_ check the "resize images" box–as mentioned in Brian K’s response to this thread.

It was the last I checked. PS still opens and re-saves the images.
You can, of course, keep a clean copy of the directory.

So PS re-saves the jpegs without any input concerning the quality level? Hmmm, are you sure?

No, I didn’t say that. I said it resaves.

Even if PS actually does open and re-save,
this would not result in significant image degradation if jpeg files are merely resaved (i.e., without any changes).

<shrug> You are free to butcher your images any way you like. I get many of my best contracts from people tired of their graphics looking like hell.

On 2004-02-29 20:40:13 -0500, Eric Gill said:

Phil Rose wrote in
news:2004022919144878552%:

On 2004-02-29 09:26:45 -0500, Eric Gill said:

Phil Rose wrote in news:pjrose-
:

In article <9JlVb.10849$>,
"Warren Sarle" wrote:

"Dale Glaser" wrote in message

I can make a photo gallery for the web, but it doesn’t SEEM like I am getting optimized (ie, Save for Web) versions of the images.

Is there
a way to do this? Or do I need to create an action first that runs Save for Web on a folder before automating them into a web gallery.

That would just degrade the images due to repeated JPEG
compression.

That’s not true (repeated compression) as long as you make certain to _not_ check the "resize images" box–as mentioned in Brian K’s response to this thread.

It was the last I checked. PS still opens and re-saves the images.
You can, of course, keep a clean copy of the directory.

So PS re-saves the jpegs without any input concerning the quality level? Hmmm, are you sure?

No, I didn’t say that. I said it resaves.

But if one does _not_ check the "resize images" box, then there is no way to input a jpeg quality level, is there. So if PS (re)saves the jpeg in this manner it would be quite contrary to its standard procedure for saving jpeg files, wouldn’t it? I suspect that under these circumstances, PS merely copies the file(s) to the web "images" folder.

Even if PS actually does open and re-save, this would not result in significant image degradation if jpeg files are merely resaved (i.e., without any changes).

<shrug> You are free to butcher your images any way you like. I get many of my best contracts from people tired of their graphics looking like hell.

I’m sure you’re able to get many contracts from clueless people. But I wonder if you’ve ever used Photoshop’s Web Photo Gallery automation. I have, and carefully compared an original file with its web version that PS placed (i.e., without "resize images") in the images folder. Comparison of the two versions via "difference" blending mode (using considerable amplification by a Levels shift) shows that there is absolutely not a shred of difference between the original and the web-gallery version.