Why do pictures in Safari look like total crap? (with proof)

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by TetheredHeart, Jun 29, 2015.

  1. TetheredHeart, Jun 29, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2015

    TetheredHeart macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    #1
    I noticed after going back to Safari after a while and browsing Flickr, that people looked weird and dead and in general the picture quality was extremely poor. So I took comparison screengrabs between Safari and Opera:


    [​IMG]

    ^^^^Safari, looks like total crap.




    [​IMG]

    ^^^^Opera, looks infinitely more alive.

    P.S. you should drag and drop to browser and open with preview to really compare, or better yet open this link in both browsers: https://www.flickr.com/photos/zaramovane/19110815721/

    EDIT: I have found out that Safari uses bilinear interpolation for resampling images during scaling. What was Apple thinking?????????
     
  2. keysofanxiety macrumors 604

    keysofanxiety

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    #2
    Looks the same to me. Nonetheless Safari occasionally has a few hiccups when you've got a large uptime.

    Have you tried restarting your Mac with the option Reopen windows when logging back in disabled? Then try again?
     
  3. TetheredHeart thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    #3
    Yes, it's still the same. And if you can't tell the difference, or even worse, don't care, then I don't know what to say. :-(

    Anyway, I'm back to Opera for good, this is just a public service announcement. But I think it would be a big deal for Apple to fix this.
     
  4. TetheredHeart, Jun 30, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2015

    TetheredHeart thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    #4
    I opened up Safari on my external monitor. Without zooming the page, the pictures look great, but immediately upon zooming they look like crap, just like on the MBP Retina display. So it's definitely a problem with the Safari scaler.

    Edit: When opened up with Preview and zoomed, although the colors are different the scaling is good, so it's not global.

    Edit2: When comparing in image software, the resampling algorithm used by Safari looks like bilinear interpolation, a very poor method for pictures.
     
  5. Samuelsan2001 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    #5
    I see no difference at all to be honest, but hey if the minor differences in image quality on the net is your thing you go ahead and use what suits you best.
     
  6. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #6
    Meh, of the two pics you posted, the Safari pic looks much better to me
    And yes I opened it in Safari and in Opera
     
  7. maflynn, Jun 30, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2015

    maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #7
    I checked both in safari and Chome and Safari looked better, the image in Chrome had a bit more (tiny really) pixillation
     
  8. keysofanxiety macrumors 604

    keysofanxiety

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    #8
    The below responses by other posters would indicate this issue may be isolated to your computer. So just a few things to ensure:

    - OS X is fully up-to-date
    - Safari is fully up-to-date
    - Volume is OK (verification through Disk Utility)
    - May be worth trying a permissions repair and restarting
    - Ensure any Flash/Java plugins (where applicable) are also fully up-to-date

    Just shooting in the dark really but it's worth checking the above.
     
  9. TetheredHeart thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    #9
    Updated Yosemite and Safari. Still uses bilinear. :-(

    And that's good. Dunno about Chrome, but Opera uses bicubic, Preview does too. Safari looks to use bilinear. Bicubic is much more widely used is photo editing because it is much more sophisticated and produces more natural and detailed results, as can plainly be seen in the samples I've provided.
     
  10. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #10
    Well it seems most of us are not plainly seeing any degradation in Safari. That's the issue while I'll not dispute what the browsers use , it seems most of us (who responded) are not seeing any issues with safari.
     
  11. TetheredHeart thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    #11
    Minor differences? Not at all, a huge difference. And if the vast majority of people nowadays don't care about "details", the people who do are all the more important, because however our awareness, everything affects us all.
     
  12. TetheredHeart thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    #12
    Well MacDawg sees a difference, although he has poor taste.
     
  13. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #13
    He did, you're right. He said that Safari looked better.
     
  14. TetheredHeart thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    #14
    I've disabled JavaScript, also loaded images directly in browser. Same difference, same fake and unnatural smoothness. I also have font smoothing turned off.
     
  15. steve23094 macrumors 68000

    steve23094

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    #15
    Did you label those the right way around? On my iPad the one you marked as Safari looks loads better, there is no comparison.
     
  16. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #16
    You must have poor taste as well :rolleyes:
     
  17. Partron22 macrumors 68000

    Partron22

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Location:
    Yes
    #17
    I picked out a dozen or so recognizable spots with Apple's Digital Color Meter.app.
    It can't tell the (RGB) difference between the two images.
     
  18. xmichaelp macrumors 68000

    xmichaelp

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    #18
    Maybe you have poor taste? :rolleyes:

    I see no difference, they both look like crap to me.
     
  19. Ulenspiegel macrumors 68020

    Ulenspiegel

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Location:
    Land of Flanders and Elsewhere
    #19


    Same here.
     
  20. TetheredHeart thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    #20


    Original. That is a nice theory, but no.
     
  21. TetheredHeart thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    #21
    Well, I'm talking about Safari on a Mac, but really good to hear the iPad Safari renders pictures better. :)

    Thank you.
     
  22. Partron22 macrumors 68000

    Partron22

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Location:
    Yes
    #22
  23. rhett7660 macrumors G4

    rhett7660

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Sunny, Southern California
    #23
    How does it look in Firefox? I am looking at in Safari, non-Retina, and it looks pretty good. Same with FF and Chrome. I attached a screen shot of the image you posted from Safari.
     

    Attached Files:

  24. takeshi74, Jul 1, 2015
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2015

    takeshi74 macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    #24
    The vast majority certainly matter. These are web browsers -- not applications used for critical photo manipulation. The majority of people won't notice a difference and it does not matter for them. The people who do notice are not more important. The matter is more important to those people. However, those people are a small niche.

    If Opera is better for you then use it.
     
  25. macnerd77 macrumors regular

    macnerd77

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Location:
    Northern California / Bay Area
    #25
    The images would seem to have different resolutions. Unless macrumors forum is modifying the resolution something else is changing it.
    Screen Shot 2015-07-01 at 2.03.10 PM.png Screen Shot 2015-07-01 at 2.03.27 PM.png
     

Share This Page