Godfrey, have you compared size and quality of jpeg 6 vs save for web 60? Personally, I find sfw 65 or so looks the same as jpeg 8 but at a much smaller file size.
-Aaron -----Original Message----- From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subj: Re: Saving for Web in PE4: update Date: Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:15 pm Size: 1K To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net I don't see it as particularly complex ... however, I don't know squat about scripting, and if I did, I may feel similarly. I use SFW because I don't know any better or faster way to get the results I want - but I don't always use SFW. Also, if I recall correctly, a lot of the SFW parameters are "sticky," so they can be used repeatedly ... hmm, maybe in an action? Why don't you post your script so we can see and learn from what you're doing. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Godfrey DiGiorgi > I see no point to using Save For Web at present. To me, it simply > presents needless additional complexity. > > I use a script in Photoshop which renders all my web images now: > > - resize/resample to web resolution sizing for H or V oriented photos > - convert to sRGB color space > - resharpen for web using standard settings 0.7pixels, 50%, threshold 2 > - convert to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - add white/black pixel border > - add standard IPTC metadata > - save as JPEG quality 6 with ICC embedded > > Why use Save for Web? > > Godfrey
