Identification, Images, & Information
For Insects, Spiders & Their Kin
For the United States & Canada
Clickable Guide
Moths Butterflies Flies Caterpillars Flies Dragonflies Flies Mantids Cockroaches Bees and Wasps Walkingsticks Earwigs Ants Termites Hoppers and Kin Hoppers and Kin Beetles True Bugs Fleas Grasshoppers and Kin Ticks Spiders Scorpions Centipedes Millipedes

Calendar
Upcoming Events

Photos of insects and people from the 2015 gathering in Wisconsin, July 10-12

Photos of insects and people from the 2014 gathering in Virginia, June 4-7.

Photos of insects and people from the 2013 gathering in Arizona, July 25-28

Photos of insects and people from the 2012 gathering in Alabama

Photos of insects and people from the 2011 gathering in Iowa

Photos from the 2010 Workshop in Grinnell, Iowa

Photos from the 2009 gathering in Washington

BugGuide using new image compression?

I'm curious if anyone knows if BugGuide is using some sort of (relatively) new image compression or something. I ask because recent images I've submitted look crisp on my PC, but after uploaded to BugGuide, they're terribly degraded from the original. In years past they always seemed much truer to the original, with very little degradation.

Here's an example of one: Manduca
(Google photos compresses also, causing some degradation, but you can still see the harsh degradation on the BugGuide version vs. the original)

Manduca
I copied your Manduca pair and looked in Photoshop with zoom. I can see some degradation, but not what I'd call "terribly degraded from the original."

What kind of images are you submitting to bugguide? I use Photoshop to export "high" jpegs in the 560 px size.

 
Images
Sorry, perhaps "terribly degraded" is a little hyperbolic, but I do think it's significant degradation.

I generally only submit jpeg images. I've typically edited them using Picasa photo editor to do basic edits (i.e., crop, lighting adjustment, etc), however, I've recently been told that Picasa directly edits the jpeg, causing loss each save. That makes sense, so I'm now going to use Photoshop. I tried a couple in Photoshop, saving as jpeg in "maximum" and "progressive" with a scan of 3. That seemed to help (here's a recent example) - at least I didn't notice any degradation when uploaded to BugGuide on that one.

I'm still a little lost on why the jpegs edited in Picasa editor looked worse on BugGuide than on my PC (edit degradation aside), and only relatively recently at that. But regardless, I definitely think I need to use Photoshop from now on. I'm just not certain whether "high" or "maximum" is a better setting, and whether "progressive" is improving the image (seems to). I think once I tinker more with it, the problem will be resolved.

No changes
The image algorithms have not changed. See this thread and Troy's original description from 2004.

 
Okay
I appreciate the reply John. I'm not sure what it is then. I use the same post processing (crop, lighting, etc) that I've always used, so I don't know why I'm getting such degraded images now. I've heard before, that editing the photo in the jpeg format can cause unnecessary degradation, but I've never had a problem previously. The only real difference is that I upgraded my camera (which seems to produce better images) - perhaps it saves the raw data differently?

Anyway, since it's not a change with BugGuide, I'll see if I can track down where I'm losing quality as I handle my images that might not be evident until the ImageMagic gets hold of them.

Thanks again.

 
I'm having the same apparent "problem"
I'm not sure why it is. Maybe because my photos are now higher resolution than usual (shouldn't have an impact, though?).

This is quite clear on the small version shown on pages for all viewers. The full screen photo (as seen by myself and editors on clicking) is perfectly fine, though. And I know some compression is likely when reducing the size, but it seems greater than usual.

 
apparent "problem"
As a test, have you tried submitting your own compression at the maximum bugguide size and then put the higher-resolution image somewhere else?

 
Testing (2/2)
I uploaded an old image just to see. The result is the same as it "used to be", meaning the compression has not changed. What seems to have changed is my perception of my photos. I still wonder how people manage to post such high quality photos though, without any apparent degradation.

 
Testing (1/2)
Original photo on right, compressed bugguide image at left. The original photo has been resized to match the size of the bugguide display size.

https://i.imgur.com/2RjUVt1.jpg

Note obvious degradation present on left image, especially on the eyes. (if the above link takes you to a gallery, close it and try again--it should take you directly to the photo)

Photo uploaded at 1500x1258, displayed on bugguide at approximately 560x468.

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click 'Save settings' to activate your changes.