Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-21-2012, 08:51 PM   #1
Senior Member
noVICE's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 164
Why has Pentax not fixed the quality of the PPG?

I know this is not the first time this has been mentioned, but seriously... how long does it take to fix the image quality on the PPG?? When I started out looking at getting into DSLR I found the Pentax Photo Gallery to be an amazing resource which ultimately convinced me to go with Pentax. The website currently presents blurry, low-res images to people who may not be aware of the typical quality of Pentax products. In my opinion this is one of the worst marketing mistakes that any company could make. I would have assumed that Ricoh would be attempting to raise the brand awareness and yet they have left a considerably important marketing tool to display their products as a poor competitor to the iPhone camera. Come on Ricoh, let's get the ball rolling on this one...

02-21-2012, 10:54 PM   #2
Senior Member
Arrvon's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 242
I agree 100%....been wondering why the quality hasn't been increased as well. In addition, I noticed too that a lot more pictures are getting through than the old PPG. I don't know if that's a good thing or not...but that's another debate all together.
02-22-2012, 12:01 AM   #3
Veteran Member
wlachan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,625
PPG was dead, it is still dead. The interface is poor and slow, the quality of pictures are mostly average to low. I cannot imagine anyone spending time browsing them other than those did submit when there are trillions awesome pics elsewhere.
02-24-2012, 03:58 AM   #4
Veteran Member
FruitLooPs's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 440
QuoteOriginally posted by wlachan Quote
PPG was dead, it is still dead. The interface is poor and slow, the quality of pictures are mostly average to low. I cannot imagine anyone spending time browsing them other than those did submit when there are trillions awesome pics elsewhere.
I find the 'new' site much more snappy to use, less fancy interface chugging along - but also the images are definitely heavily compressed and soft, maybe it helps with the speed of the site but its pretty terrible.

02-24-2012, 01:01 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Sacramento, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 728
I don't really like PPG either. Old site was really graphic intensive and resource draining on my computer. New site is simpler, but the way they present the photos? C'mon! Lots of blurry cam under exposed stuff. They really need to get a handle on what's being displayed. If I were someone researching the brand and comparing images to competitors, I would pass on Pentax. The photos they present are just too "amateurish", when I know there are a lot of exceptional Pentax photogs out there.
02-24-2012, 01:20 PM   #6
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,727
There was (is) an option to "upgrade" your selected pictures to a 900 px size for a limited time - I believe it is March 1st 2012.

However, I have somewhere around 200 + pics in there and I thought this would be a PITB to resize+resubmit each one.

So, I have opened a Flickr account a little while back and find that my pictures now show as they are meant to be.
The details are not lost and it is so much easier to post from that site to another, for instance.

I will likely retrieve all the originals on my computer (from PPG accepted sub,issions) and post them at Flickr.

JP
02-26-2012, 02:03 PM   #7
Ash
Community Manager
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,324
The image rendition has improved since it was relaunched, but I'm finding it increasingly difficult to be able to link images from the gallery.
Nevertheless, I don't believe it's a failure - it just needs ongoing tweaking...
04-28-2012, 01:12 AM   #8
Forum Member
Gillies's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 50
I just searched out this thread because I just noticed the poor quality in my last two approved images. To add insult, I see that the image quality seem to be rendered properly on my dashboard but not in my gallery.
I followed jpzk,s lead and opened a flicker account last night only to see that they have far superior resolution, as does panoramio.
I can only say that I won't be sending anymore PPG links out until this issue has been rectified.

04-28-2012, 01:18 AM   #9
Veteran Member
TOUGEFC's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,561
Ive given up with PPG.
Its not what it used to be
04-28-2012, 01:19 PM   #10
Ash
Community Manager
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,324
I'm not sure. It seems to render quite fine now.
These images are direct links from PPG:









They're as sharp and colourful as the resized originals...
How do they look on your screen?
04-28-2012, 05:40 PM   #11
Forum Member
Gillies's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 50
To Ash
Have you tried flipping back and forth between a blowup on your dash board and your gallery shot? This is where I noticed the difference.
04-28-2012, 09:29 PM   #12
Senior Member
noVICE's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 164
Original Poster
Thanks for the heads up Ash. The images are looking a lot better now. I still get the feeling that they are not at 100% quality though. I just searched K5 - FA 31mm and many of the images are not as sharp as I would have expected. It could be that the photos themselves are not very sharp, but I have trouble believing that so many truly are. Here is a screen grab from PPG. This image was shot with a K5 + FA 31mm, 1/350 sec Exposure, F3.5. http://img804.imageshack.us/img804/9846/ppgexample1.jpg
Here is (I assume) the point of focus of the image.


I still feel there may be some issues for PPG to figure out. I am using Firefox, so maybe it is a browser related problem? Either way I still believe that this website needs to be a showcase of what Pentax cameras and Lenses can do and I would prefer stricter controls on what is shown there. As I have said before this is a major advertising tool for Pentax, it would be silly to diminish the quality of the website.
04-29-2012, 04:09 AM   #13
Ash
Community Manager
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,324
QuoteOriginally posted by Gillies Quote
To Ash
Have you tried flipping back and forth between a blowup on your dash board and your gallery shot? This is where I noticed the difference.
I only look at the images at 100%, and as such I see no differences. Of course if they're blown up above 100% they'll not look neat. I have my originals to give me a better look at these images on my computer screen.
04-29-2012, 04:15 AM   #14
Ash
Community Manager
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,324
QuoteOriginally posted by noVICE Quote
Thanks for the heads up Ash. The images are looking a lot better now. I still get the feeling that they are not at 100% quality though. I just searched K5 - FA 31mm and many of the images are not as sharp as I would have expected. It could be that the photos themselves are not very sharp, but I have trouble believing that so many truly are. Here is a screen grab from PPG. This image was shot with a K5 + FA 31mm, 1/350 sec Exposure, F3.5. http://img804.imageshack.us/img804/9846/ppgexample1.jpg
Here is (I assume) the point of focus of the image.


I still feel there may be some issues for PPG to figure out. I am using Firefox, so maybe it is a browser related problem? Either way I still believe that this website needs to be a showcase of what Pentax cameras and Lenses can do and I would prefer stricter controls on what is shown there. As I have said before this is a major advertising tool for Pentax, it would be silly to diminish the quality of the website.
I use Safari and haven't had a problem with my own images for a few months now. It used to be quite blurry at one stage soon after the overhaul. What you're showing me with this image is indeed soft, and I can't tell why. If you see my linked images better than you see the ones on PPG, then I'm confused as to where the blu rinses gets introduced to your images.
04-29-2012, 04:15 AM   #15
Veteran Member
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
PPG is a waste of electrons in the WWW.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
pentax, photo industry, photography, products, quality, ricoh
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
will a good quality ND filter retain 100% pic quality? liukaitc Photographic Technique 20 01-14-2012 09:05 PM
Pentax should make a fixed lens APS-C camera! RonHendriks1966 Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 07-28-2011 11:17 AM
Pentax 67 55mm/f4 late lens fixed tilt modication leping Pentax Medium Format 6 07-12-2011 03:08 PM
Finally Pentax fixed Hyperprogram! Edvinas Pentax K-5 27 11-26-2010 12:39 PM
Pentax K-5 bugs will be fixed soon... no worries... luke0622 Pentax K-5 47 11-13-2010 08:10 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:52 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top