Hi folks. Can anyone tell me why my all my slave images work well in safari, and only most work in Firefox.
http://www.macrisdirect.com/dmportfolio.html
Thumbnail image #4 (the yellow print ad) will not load the slave in Firefox. But safari works fine.
All slave images are the same size and format. I’m perplexed.
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
sorry, make that
http://www.macrisdirect.com/printportfolio.html
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Hi Andrew,
They aren’t working at all in Firefox for me. Could you send your
Freeway file to email@hidden so we can take a look at what
may be happening. We can’t reproduce the problem here.
Many thanks,
Joe
On 11 Dec 2007, at 14:12, Andrew Macris wrote:
sorry, make that
http://www.macrisdirect.com/printportfolio.html
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
It looks there is something wrong with the jpg. If you look at it directly in the browser, it displays fine in safari, but not in firefox, camino, opera, netscape…
http://www.macrisdirect.com/Resources/JU.jpg
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Sure, I can email it at lunch (Eastern time US). Confused by your email address. Want me to send to Softpress support?
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
I have seen problems in the past when somehow a CMYK JPEG makes its
way onto the Web. Safari never has a problem with these, but all
other browsers throw up their tiny hands. If you made this image in
Photoshop or similar, and inserted it in your page as a pass-through,
then that’s a possible reason why this is happening in Freeway.
Freeway will never make a CMYK JPEG on its own.
Walter
On Dec 11, 2007, at 9:53 AM, maccie wrote:
It looks there is something wrong with the jpg. If you look at it
directly in the browser, it displays fine in safari, but not in
firefox, camino, opera, netscape…
http://www.macrisdirect.com/Resources/JU.jpg
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Sorry, I should have said that I work for Softpress or at least used
my signature. If the problem is the CMYK issue as Walter mentioned
then don’t worry about sending it through.
Best wishes,
Joe Billings
Support Technician
Softpress Systems Ltd
On 11 Dec 2007, at 14:54, Andrew Macris wrote:
Sure, I can email it at lunch (Eastern time US). Confused by your
email address. Want me to send to Softpress support?
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
I think this is original a .psd image that is saved as a psd but with the .jpg extension. That will explain the invalid marker when trying to open this picture. I have tried opening it with photoshop, no succes. Changed the extension to .psd, succes, it opens.
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Gotcha. Resave all images as RGB jpgs.
Credits to Softpress for allowing a copywriter to design. At work, I have production artists to take care of details like this:)
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Not only does it allow a copywriter to design, it’s allowed me, also a
copywriter, to actually produce a profitable sideline to my creativity
that adds interest to my workload. Especially now I’m semi retired and
free to pick the jobs I want to do.
Colin
On 11 Dec 2007, at 16:06, Andrew Macris wrote:
Gotcha. Resave all images as RGB jpgs.
Credits to Softpress for allowing a copywriter to design. At work, I
have production artists to take care of details like this:)
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
The issue then is that you managed to put a PSD file in your page as
a pass-through. Freeway Pro can use PSD files and will always convert
them on output to something browser-friendly. It appears as though
Freeway just took the word of the filename extension, and never dug
any deeper into the file to see what it really was.
Walter
On Dec 11, 2007, at 10:59 AM, maccie wrote:
I think this is original a .psd image that is saved as a psd but
with the .jpg extension. That will explain the invalid marker when
trying to open this picture. I have tried opening it with
photoshop, no succes. Changed the extension to .psd, succes, it opens.
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
That depends. Save all your images as Photoshop PSD files if you
want, but don’t import these as pass-through images in that case.
If you want to see several good reasons why you should leave JPEG
compression for the very last thing you do, enter “jpeg artifacts” in
the search field on the Web forum.
<http://freewaytalk.net/search_results.html?search=jpeg
+artifacts&forum=5>
Walter
On Dec 11, 2007, at 11:06 AM, Andrew Macris wrote:
Gotcha. Resave all images as RGB jpgs.
Credits to Softpress for allowing a copywriter to design. At work,
I have production artists to take care of details like this:)
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Props to the board here. I guess did not save all my images properly. I’m so used to Freeway doing fixing it for me, I guess I got lazy. All images are now certified jpgs, and work fine in my Firefox /2.0.0.11
thanks again,
Andrew.
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Sometime around 11/12/07 (at 13:13 -0500) Andrew Macris said:
Props to the board here. I guess did not save all my images
properly. I’m so used to Freeway doing fixing it for me, I guess I
got lazy. All images are now certified jpgs, and work fine in my
Firefox /2.0.0.11
Note that except when you have specific known reasons for wanting to
use pass-through images you should really leave the JPEG compression
to Freeway.
Save your images in a non-lossy format that doesn’t degrade them,
leaving you free to edit and resave whenever you like. Import the
native Photoshop PSD or TIFFs to your Freeway layout, and let the
JPEG production be done by Freeway.
There are some good reasons why you might use passthroughs instead.
But it doesn’t sound to me like you’re in need of that.
k
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Sometime around 11/12/07 (at 12:01 -0500) Walter Lee Davis said:
It appears as though
Freeway just took the word of the filename extension, and never dug
any deeper into the file to see what it really was.
That’s fairly normal behaviour. Photoshop itself will fail to open an
image that’s been given an incorrect filename extension, even if the
image is something it just made. The Mac OS does a good job of
preventing users from assigning the wrong filename extension, but it
can still happen.
The filename extension is just a label that says “this is the kind of
thing I am”. But that label is taken at face value by virtually all
apps, so it is more than a bit important.
k
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
So Keith, in your opinion, how does Freeway compare to something like
ImageReady which offers visible control while optimising the image?
If one is concerned about the level of artifacting versus file size
then surely optimising it before Freeway and then using passthrough
is the way to go. Take your point re editing but if the site is
reaching its final state then optimising for speed of loading is a
worthwhile concern, isn’t it?
To reinforce your point below, there is a general rule that one
shouldn’t save a JPEG more than once, ie don’t Jpeg a Jpeg as data is
lost and artifacts created at every save through compression.
Cheers
Pete
On 11 Dec 2007, at 19:55, Keith Martin wrote:
Sometime around 11/12/07 (at 13:13 -0500) Andrew Macris said:
Props to the board here. I guess did not save all my images
properly. I’m so used to Freeway doing fixing it for me, I guess I
got lazy. All images are now certified jpgs, and work fine in my
Firefox /2.0.0.11Note that except when you have specific known reasons for wanting to
use pass-through images you should really leave the JPEG compression
to Freeway.Save your images in a non-lossy format that doesn’t degrade them,
leaving you free to edit and resave whenever you like. Import the
native Photoshop PSD or TIFFs to your Freeway layout, and let the
JPEG production be done by Freeway.There are some good reasons why you might use passthroughs instead.
But it doesn’t sound to me like you’re in need of that.k
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Pete - although technical perfection is worth striving for, it is the
perceived quality on a monitor at only 72ppi that really matters.
A .psd or .tif file optimised by Freeway is usually pretty good if you
set the JPEG at 70% or better. It is one of Freeway’s particular
strengths. Size may not be as small as you can make it in ImageReady,
but with the increasing dominance of broadband this is less of a worry
except for heavily graphic laden sites or very large images. In the
last case you are going to trade off quality, anyway, if you really
tighten up the file size. Also, another feature of Freeway, you can
chop up images so that they display at different optimisations
according to the detail contained - e.g higher for lettering, lower
fro nebulous areas. (Just don’t ask me how, for the moment, I’d have
to look it up).
In short, you can be more productive using high quality originals
‘processed’ just the once by Freeway and maintain a consistent quality
that most monitors with display as crisp, clean images of good colour
depth. It might not be the answer for the perfectionist, but most site
visitors will never appreciate the difference. They won’t be staring
at the screen as long as we do!
Colin
On 11 Dec 2007, at 21:23, Pete MacKenzie wrote:
So Keith, in your opinion, how does Freeway compare to something like
ImageReady which offers visible control while optimising the image?
…optimising for speed of loading is a worthwhile concern, isn’t it?
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
On 11 Dec 2007, at 21:23, Pete MacKenzie wrote:
So Keith, in your opinion, how does Freeway compare to something like
ImageReady which offers visible control while optimising the image?
I’m not Keith, but I will say: turn on Graphics Preview in the View
menu and you can observer the effect of Freeway’s JPEG-ing with a
live view.
best wishes
Paul Bradforth
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Paul, thanks for the tip. I’ll play with that.
Colin, thanks for the reply. I tend to let Freeway do most of the
work for sites that I work on but I do have to optimise images for
other people at times with ImageReady. Anyway, the answer seems to be
that there is little difference in the long run - which is nice…
Cheers
Pete
On 11 Dec 2007, at 22:09, Paul Bradforth wrote:
On 11 Dec 2007, at 21:23, Pete MacKenzie wrote:
So Keith, in your opinion, how does Freeway compare to something like
ImageReady which offers visible control while optimising the image?I’m not Keith, but I will say: turn on Graphics Preview in the View
menu and you can observer the effect of Freeway’s JPEG-ing with a
live view.best wishes
Paul Bradforth
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Sometime around 11/12/07 (at 21:23 +0000) Pete MacKenzie said:
So Keith, in your opinion, how does Freeway compare to something like
ImageReady which offers visible control while optimising the image?
Try turning on Graphics Preview. You can see the compression effects
right in the page. The output is exactly the same as from standard
JPEG compressors in other tools for equivalent original images
compressed to the same byte size.
Take your point re editing but if the site is
reaching its final state then optimising for speed of loading is a
worthwhile concern, isn’t it?
Absolutely. You can do this as well in Freeway as anywhere else, and
if you want to change the effect (for greater compression or greater
quality) just change it in the Inspector.
Scaling images can sometimes be better done in Photoshop, for the
final version anyway, with a little sharpening applied. The
difference is minor, but in some circumstances it is worth doing.
There, you might prefer to optimise to JPEG too and bring in as a
passthrough… but even then, you can save the scaled image as
Photoshop and optimise more flexibly in Freeway.
Just be aware that Freeway’s JPEG compression percentage setting
doesn’t match Photoshop’s, so don’t try comparing the same percentage
compression outputs. It appears that there’s no single standard; most
apps seem to use their own scales for compression levels.
To reinforce your point below, there is a general rule that one
shouldn’t save a JPEG more than once, ie don’t Jpeg a Jpeg as data is
lost and artifacts created at every save through compression.
Absolutely. Although I’d say this is nearer to an absolute rule! 
k
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
