Photos at IE, Firefox, Opera

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Luigi Donatello Asero, Sep 20, 2006.

  1. Luigi Donatello Asero, Sep 20, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Sep 20, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Luigi Donatello Asero

    cwdjrxyz Guest

    Luigi Donatello Asero wrote:
    > Why on earth do photos look much better on this PC when I browse them by IE
    > rather than by Firefox and Opera?
    > For example this
    > https://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/bilder/giocatrice/giocatrice-pallamano-foto1.jpg



    I can't see any difference in the picture quality when viewed on the
    latest versions of Opera, Firefox, and IE6. However browsers have a few
    settings that allow you to change how an image is viewed. It is
    possible that some of these settings for your browsers might be
    different from those for mine. For exampe, when you select the "view"
    tab on Opera, you are given 3 ways to view the picture. Firefox has a
    selection under advanced options to resize images to fit the screen,
    but since your example is 640 x 480 px this should not matter unless
    one is using a very narrow screen width on a very old computer or some
    hand-held device. Some browsers center the images, others not. Some use
    a white background, and some use black. Opera uses both white and black
    depending on options that you select. I did not investigate this
    subject in detail, so if you search the more obscure menus of the
    various browers, you may find more settings for the image.
     
    cwdjrxyz, Sep 21, 2006
    #3
  4. "cwdjrxyz" <> skrev i meddelandet
    news:...
    >
    > Luigi Donatello Asero wrote:
    > > Why on earth do photos look much better on this PC when I browse them by

    IE
    > > rather than by Firefox and Opera?
    > > For example this
    > >

    https://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/bilder/giocatrice/giocatrice-pallamano-foto1.jpg
    >
    >
    > I can't see any difference in the picture quality when viewed on the
    > latest versions of Opera, Firefox, and IE6.


    So, how does it look like? Bad in all of them or good in all of them?
    They look different on Windows 98 but on another PC where I use Windows XP
    they look quite the same at IE and Firefox.


    However browsers have a few
    > settings that allow you to change how an image is viewed. It is
    > possible that some of these settings for your browsers might be
    > different from those for mine. For exampe, when you select the "view"
    > tab on Opera, you are given 3 ways to view the picture.


    Which ones and which version of Opera were you talking about?

    Firefox has a
    > selection under advanced options to resize images to fit the screen,
    > but since your example is 640 x 480 px this should not matter unless
    > one is using a very narrow screen width on a very old computer or some
    > hand-held device.



    Some browsers center the images, others not. Some use
    > a white background, and some use black. Opera uses both white and black
    > depending on options that you select. I did not investigate this
    > subject in detail, so if you search the more obscure menus of the
    > various browers, you may find more settings for the image.


    Well, the background might play a role at Opera.
    But what about Firefox?


    --
    Luigi Donatello Asero
    https://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/it/svezia.html
    我是æ„大利人
     
    Luigi Donatello Asero, Sep 22, 2006
    #4
  5. Luigi Donatello Asero

    cwdjrxyz Guest

    Luigi Donatello Asero wrote:

    > So, how does it look like? Bad in all of them or good in all of them?
    > They look different on Windows 98 but on another PC where I use Windows XP
    > they look quite the same at IE and Firefox.


    I am using Windows XP with all upgrades. Browsers used were Firefox
    1.5.0.7, IE6, Netscape 8.1, Mozilla 1.7.13, Opera 9.01, Netscape 4.8,
    Amaya 8.1b, and a WebTV viewer program. Because your image is on a
    secure page the Amaya browser and WebTV viewer will not display the
    image at all. When all of these browsers are in their default settings
    as delivered, you view the image at full pixel size, and it appears
    exactly the same to me. All have a white background in the default
    settings. However in opera you can use f11 to switch between a white
    and full-screen black background. You can also select a small image on
    Opera. I do not recall any changes in image quality over many upgrades
    of most of the mentioned browsers.

    How images look is a subjective decision. It depends on the quality of
    the photo, the resolution used for the digital image, etc. This can be
    very subjective. Unless one has an expert Hollywood makeup artist, a
    close up photo of a woman often looks better to many if the photo is
    made slightly out of focus. This hides pores, hairs, and tiny skin
    blemishes. Thus higher resolution does not always mean "better" on a
    subjective basis. Also, many computer monitors and TVs have never been
    carefully adjusted for accurate color rendition, contrast, brightness,
    etc. Before one starts discussing how images view on two different
    computers or TV sets, on should be certain that both have been
    calibrated, or the discussion has little meaning. The best way to do
    this is to use a calibration DVD designed for adjusting home theatre.
    However I have a page that will let you see if the most important
    monitor adjustments are far off. It is at
    http://www.cwdjr.net/tool/a_color_bars.html . Of course, on an absolute
    basis, the images used on most web pages are quite poor because of the
    low pixel count used to avoid slow downloads. A good digital photo
    these days will be at least 2M and even 10 M for the better cameras.
    Enlarge most web page images a bit, and and you will soon see what I
    mean.

    You mentioned Windows 98 as well as XP. I wonder if 98 has the same
    color depth as XP? Color depth has more to do with accuracy of color
    rendition than anything else. There could be other things different for
    98 or other old OSs that might have some influence on how images are
    displayed. I have never used a Windows OS earlier than XP.
     
    cwdjrxyz, Sep 22, 2006
    #5
  6. "cwdjrxyz" <> skrev i meddelandet
    news:...
    >
    > Luigi Donatello Asero wrote:
    >
    > > So, how does it look like? Bad in all of them or good in all of them?
    > > They look different on Windows 98 but on another PC where I use Windows

    XP
    > > they look quite the same at IE and Firefox.

    >
    > I am using Windows XP with all upgrades. Browsers used were Firefox
    > 1.5.0.7, IE6, Netscape 8.1, Mozilla 1.7.13, Opera 9.01, Netscape 4.8,
    > Amaya 8.1b, and a WebTV viewer program. Because your image is on a
    > secure page the Amaya browser and WebTV viewer will not display the
    > image at all. When all of these browsers are in their default settings
    > as delivered, you view the image at full pixel size, and it appears
    > exactly the same to me. All have a white background in the default
    > settings. However in opera you can use f11 to switch between a white
    > and full-screen black background. You can also select a small image on
    > Opera. I do not recall any changes in image quality over many upgrades
    > of most of the mentioned browsers.
    >
    > How images look is a subjective decision. It depends on the quality of
    > the photo, the resolution used for the digital image, etc. This can be
    > very subjective. Unless one has an expert Hollywood makeup artist, a
    > close up photo of a woman often looks better to many if the photo is
    > made slightly out of focus. This hides pores, hairs, and tiny skin
    > blemishes. Thus higher resolution does not always mean "better" on a
    > subjective basis. Also, many computer monitors and TVs have never been
    > carefully adjusted for accurate color rendition, contrast, brightness,
    > etc. Before one starts discussing how images view on two different
    > computers or TV sets, on should be certain that both have been
    > calibrated, or the discussion has little meaning. The best way to do
    > this is to use a calibration DVD designed for adjusting home theatre.
    > However I have a page that will let you see if the most important
    > monitor adjustments are far off. It is at
    > http://www.cwdjr.net/tool/a_color_bars.html . Of course, on an absolute
    > basis, the images used on most web pages are quite poor because of the
    > low pixel count used to avoid slow downloads. A good digital photo
    > these days will be at least 2M and even 10 M for the better cameras.
    > Enlarge most web page images a bit, and and you will soon see what I
    > mean.


    > You mentioned Windows 98 as well as XP. I wonder if 98 has the same
    > color depth as XP?

    Perhaps they do not. But how does that explain why the colours are displayed
    in a very different way on
    IE, Opera and Firefox using the same OP on the same computer?

    --
    Luigi Donatello Asero
    www.om-italien.eu
    她是澳大利亚人
     
    Luigi Donatello Asero, Sep 22, 2006
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?Um9zcw==?=

    Server Error in Photos Application

    =?Utf-8?B?Um9zcw==?=, Oct 28, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    350
    =?Utf-8?B?Um9zcw==?=
    Oct 29, 2004
  2. ©®
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    417
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty
    Dec 12, 2003
  3. Luigi Donatello Asero

    Quality of the photos on the website

    Luigi Donatello Asero, Jan 17, 2004, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    432
    Alan D-W
    Jan 17, 2004
  4. Kooner

    captions under photos

    Kooner, Jun 1, 2004, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    35
    Views:
    1,263
    Mark Parnell
    Jun 30, 2004
  5. Bob
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    1,549
Loading...

Share This Page