Hello! I'm just wondering how other high pixel count camera owners handle attaching photos to emails. My D7100 on the standard jpeg compression setting creates files anywhere from 9MB to 16 MB. On average about 12MB. Most ISPs will not allow email attachments over 20MB. That's only one full rez photo per email. Due to that I usually reduce my photos from 6000 x 4000 to 1600 x 1200. I also consider it bad taste to send a full rez photo to someone I know that doesn't have broadband. I have broadband and frequently see less than 1 Mbps after 9p (COMCAST SUCKS!). Based on that I know how long it takes to send a full rez photo and I don't want to put my addressees through that wait. Is that just me or do you consider your recipients Internet speed? Finally what rez do you mostly reduce to? Thanks!
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Posted 15 June 2014 - 04:46 PM
It's rarely necessary to e-mail full-size files- if you waned to share full-size files with a customer, for example, uploading them to a server (i.e. dropbox) would be a better idea. I normally scale between 1000-1200px for horizontals and 800px for verticals, as those sizes look good on computer screens.
Posted 15 June 2014 - 05:14 PM
Posted 15 June 2014 - 05:25 PM
Posted 15 June 2014 - 06:21 PM
I use Google Drive, just cos I happen to have gmail accounts. Once loaded one option is to share just with people who have the link, the link is quite long and complicated. I presume Google doesn't turn up my pictures in any searches by others! I then give the recipient a week to download, then remove the files. Seems extremely unlikely anyone else would get my files.
Posted 15 June 2014 - 07:04 PM
I believe Comcast has a 25MB limit. The question is, when you send an email containing 22MB worth of files, and the recipient uses an email that only accepts 20MB, does the file not go through?
I use Zenfolio, and it has galleries that I can make private, and then send the link only to the intended person. I can block all regular photos on the website from download capability, but then allow downloading for the linked gallery only.
I find that when viewing on screen, decreasing jpeg file size to 65% in Lightroom when exporting, virtually has no distinguishable loss of quality. Under 65%, though, and you start to notice some degradation.
Posted 15 June 2014 - 07:22 PM
The long and complicated is not a problem since all they are doing is clicking on the link. It just makes it hard for somebody else to guess.
Posted 15 June 2014 - 07:54 PM
I hear you, but these people I'm referring to are hard pressed to click on links! When they call me because their computer doesn't work I get over there and some piece of crap software they downloaded has their browser locked up, or they have Chrome and I.E. competing against one another, or their virus checker has the browser locked up, or some windows file is corrupted all because they clicked on an email link. Truth be known 50% of computer users are this way. The other 50% are fixing the other 50%.
Posted 15 June 2014 - 09:59 PM
That's basically what I've been doing. On my personal web pages I make slide shows that initially load internet friendly images, but if the viewer pauses their cursor over the image they are prompted by a question that asks if they'd like to download the full rez image. If they choose yes then they are prompted with a warning about size.
Posted 16 June 2014 - 12:19 PM
I have to wonder why you'd want to send an email containing files bigger than about 900x600 pixels (that's about a 100kByte jpeg file) to people who aren't computer-literate enough to do anything other than view the attachments inline. Downsizing images is easy, even if you want to do a lot of them it should be no more than a few mouse clicks.
Unless you know that the recipient wants to do something other than view the pictures on screen, I think anything bigger than 900x600 is a waste.
Posted 16 June 2014 - 01:13 PM
Sending fullsize pictures to people who only use their computers in a limited way, is likely not that usefull to them.
Your idea of offering on your website(s) the possibility to be able to download fullsize pictures is also a valid idea.
However if that is a concern to you, then I don't understand your comments made in post #7 (control of your photos taken over by some indiscriminant server), unless your sites are secured with a login/password.
So getting back to the initial question:
- if you attach (multiple) photos to an email, use compressed formats so it does not overload the recipients mailbox or line.
- If you have a specific photo which is of special interest to someone, you might send that special photo with the maximum size of what the recipients provider allows for.