Have a peek

Beautiful!

Tnx. Still practicing Bryce. The longer I use it I discover more, but never without u're help, gang. Tnx

Attached Link: http://uk.geocities.com/bryster3d

You know....I'm constantly disappointed at the quality of the pictures as they appear on websites. Somewhere there must be someone who knows how to get images uploaded so that they look as good on site as they obviously do at home on our own monitors. Duga: once again you have created a beautiful piece of work..what a shame the web doesn't do it justice. Since first seeing your stuff I have been experimenting with precious stones and have been astounded at the results. Regards The Bryster (Chris)

Duga, it's coming along nicely! I think you need to tweak the prongs a bit and work on lighting just a touch, but it's all pulling together well. A thought on the prongs: You may be able to craft them with metaballs so that they are more fluid like smashed metal (which they are) and less like bent wire. cshaftoe, I don't notice a difference at all between what I see in Bryce and what I upload. I do see jpeg and gif compression on some images, but that's all. What specifically are you seeing that isn't good? I'll try to help the best I can. I have a gallery on renderosity with a few images in it, and all appear the same on my monitor whether I'm looking at them in Bryce, Photoshop or a browser. Do you see anything wrong with them? (Image quality, that is) =)

Attached Link: http://uk.geocities.com/bryster3d

Johnpenn: I find that object edges are often blurred or fuzzy. Whereas the pic in say PSP7 is razor sharp and indeed on B5 the same pic uploaded suffers greatly. Checkout the 'Chess Board' images on my site and compare them to the 'DESK' or 'Atlantis' pics and I'm sure you'll see what I mean. On my monitor the 'Chess' images are incredible, but the same images when viewed on aol are poor to say the least. I'm sue you get the idea. I'll checkout your site shortly. In the meantime...thankyou for your comments. Regards The Bryster

I don't model with Bryce, only render. I feel so comfortable with Rhino I never want to use any other app. But as far as rendering goes I'm open to suggestions

csh, I found the problem with your images. Your html is calling out the image dimensions. That's a good thing, it makes the webpage render more quickly in the web browser. But, your html is telling the browser to resample the image. For example, your standard chess set pic (room3.jpg) is 600x450 pixels. But your html makes the browser display the image at 686 x 520 pixels. Because the browser has to resample (resize) the image, it gets blurry and jagged. I see that you are using FrontPage to make your site. I've never used it personally, but what I think is happening is that you are resizing your image in FrontPage, and so FrontPage writes the html and tells the browser to resize the images. To fix it, you have to either A: render the image at 686x520, B: use photoshop to change the image size to 686x520, or C: (what I'd do) change the html so that the image height and width are exactly equal to the size of the image. You can probably enter numerical values in FrontPage, but if not, you can edit the html in any text editor like notepad. Just look for where it says this: img border="0" src="room3.jpg" width="686" height="520" and change the width and height to 600 and 450. If you are unsure of how big the image is in pixels, open the image in a new browser window, and depending on which browser it should say the pixel dimensions on the title bar.

here's something you might not know: if you wan't to keep your images sharp, export your rendered picture as a bmp. file. there is no compression this way. after that, open the file into photshop, and save it as a JPEG. photoshop's compression algorithims are top notch, so you don't lose very much, if any picture quality.(this of course, all depends on the picture size and quality to begin with). also, you probably do not want to bring the compression below 4 or 5(out of 12). I would say 5 might be the lowest you would want to go to keep the image quality, but you may also want to play around with that to see if there is any noticable diffrence.

In addition to big_hoovie's comments (actually, more of a supplement), Photoshop 5.5 and higher has a "Save for Web" feature. It'll display 2 or 4 (your choice) panes so you can see the orignal image next to a preview of the jpeg or gif and then tweak the compression to get the best quality/filesize ratio. It's one of those things that makes me wonder how I ever got along without. My other software tips are for the Mac, so they do you little good. But DeBabelizer is a great app for shrinking web grpahic's file sizes, and Graphic Converter is very nice too (and they're both much cheaper than Photoshop) One last thing: .bmp format is a pain for us in the design/print world. Please use .tif It's not compressed so you lose no quality at all (unless you intentionally use LZW compression, and you shouldn't unless absolutely necessary). TIFF is also natively cross-platform, and I think it supports more channels for masks and such. It's the standard format for continuous tone images (apart from .eps) in the printing world.

ok gang I apologise for not telling u my apps: PS 7.0, Bryce 5.01 and naturally Rhino 2.0 I dont use frontpage and I have no idea how anyone can draw such a conclusion without knowing. About the bmp & web, up to now I took the Bryce render to PS to add sig and save for web. I'm not sure this is a bad idea since PS guys know best. I use 52% and I can get higher.

Your HTML editor is using different demensions for your room3.jpg file. Or did you what the height stretched? I use 15% compression when saving to JPG to keep the pic looking good. SHONNER http://www.shonner.com

Many thanks to you all for your advice on compression etc. Duga: I seem to have highjacked your thread and for this I apologize. If anyone wants to add to this perhaps they could start a new thread of mail me on Bryster3d@aol.com Regards The Bryster (Chris)

Also if you can't afforf the Price photoshop 7, (gee, it's so cheap, NOT!) then Photoshop elements 2.0 is a good alternative. It is based on the code to 7.0, has the save for web features, and many other PS features, but lacks some of the "PRO" features. But for most prosumers, this is a perfect app, at a fraction of the cost. Oh yeah it comes with the Windows AND the Mac version on one cd, and runs native in OSX too. Personally I use Photshop 7, but I need those PRO features. I did start with elements 1.0 though, before eventually upgrading to PS6. -Paul