Hi Mike,
Thanks for your quick response and that info. So is there a difference in the compression levels between the various uploading methods? I would have thought the end result would have been the same for each. I normally just use the basic html method rather than the uploading programs (old or new).
I could just switch to external hosting, but that would be less convenient of course. It's much easier just having everything in the one place. I understand that there needs to be limits on physical sizing in order to reduce space and bandwidth, but I just really think the loss of picture quality at the current compression standard is just too high.
I've been noticing it more in recent months, whereas in the years before that I've never had a problem. It would be great if Auctiva could maintain the same size restrictions if need be, but allow users to choose minimal compression in exchange for using more of their allocated space. For me, the trade off would be well worthwhile.
Ebay is also compressing images more than they used to. There is a line where loss of quality starts to detract from the item in the eyes of most regular people. Most people I know don't understand much about image compression, or much about photography/imaging in general. Meaning they aren't really aware of what goes into making a great picture. They just see a good picture, or a bad picture simply by how it looks. But that then also translates directly to how they view the item. Sometimes people can't differentiate between a bad image, and the item itself. Meaning if the pic looks bad, then the item is bad. That's part of the reason a lot of good items sell for less than they should on ebay. It's often because people are taking terrible flash photos on their iphones. If something doesn't look good, people generally don't take a chance on it.
I was selling some artwork on ebay just recently, and was disappointed at the loss of sharpness, and slightly off-colour representation being shown in the images. I had to offer to email photos directly to some potential customers so that they could see how the pictures were meant to look. That is a less professional approach from my position, so that's why I would need to look into image hosting elsewhere. I like using the Auctiva templates, but I may just have to look at something completely different.
I think Auctiva will find some others thinking this way also. Perhaps if Auctiva wants to maintain their compression level where it is, then that could stay as the default. But I would gladly manage my space better in return for being able to retain the quality as a user option. At any given time also, there would be a huge number of images being stored on Auctiva from user's past listings that they no longer need or use. That is the case for me also. If I had to, I would remove them more often to conserve space.
Mike, I would be very happy to respond to any of the people involved directly in the imaging area if they want to contact me. I am sure this will be become a greater problem for Auctiva if it isn't addressed, and there is bound to be some loss of customers to other services. Image quality in sales is very important to a lot of sellers.
Thanks again,
Ash