Re-saving a report deteriorates image quality

Hi, when my colleague is saving his report in Report Builder 6i many times, the image on it (a company logo) keeps deteriotating. For example, the white part keeps getting a shade of gray after saving. Currently the temp solution is to reimport the image after everything else is ready and no further changes needed.
Is there a proper way to deal with images in Report 6i so the image quality stays? Many thanks.

If your colleage is using Oracle 11i ERP:
Instead of importing the logo to the report, store the logo as a Document with Data Type = File. You can get to the Documents form in several responsibilities. Once the document is saved to the server, you can add an SQL query to your Data Model to call it.
SELECT flobs.file_data Logo
FROM fnd_lobs flobs,
fnd_documents_vl fdoc
WHERE fdoc.document_id = <your document id>
AND fdoc.media_id = flobs.file_id
AND upper(flobs.file_content_type) like '%IMAGE/%'
In the Layout Model, add a field with Source = Logo.
-Tracy

Similar Messages

Exporting Photos from Lightroom 3 vs. Saving JPEGs from Photoshop IMAGE QUALITY

Hi all,
I'm not quite understanding why if I export a photo from Lightroom 3, the thumbnail looks great in Finder (if you max out display size) but when I edit the same photo from Photoshop and save it, the thumbnail image is blurry. Opening images comes out the same. I'm just being nitpicky, it's kind of annoying. Can anyone explain the difference? Thanks!

Image Quality Processing Multiple Images

When I first installed PSE, I could process multiple images and have the new image auto saved
at the same image quality of the original. Now it changes to a value of
"3" ...and I can't figure out how to predefine it to a higher quality

I get in "Full" edit mode, then click File / Process Multple FIles.
Then I select my source folder and my destination folder ...next I select one or several of the "Quick Fix" options ...usually just Auto Contrast.
Finally I click "OK"
The last few times, the new "processed" file is saved at ~400-500 KB ...instead of the original 3-4 MB.
Any help would be appreciated.

Image Quality in PDF Reports

Hi,
I have a rectangular JPG image which is holding the company logo. Most of the image's background is coloured white.
If I import the image into MS Word for example, when I print out the document the image is very high quality, sharp, etc.
When I import this image into an Oracle Reports via menu: insert / image, although it appears fine when looking at it in Report Builder on the 'Paper Layout', when I run the report the image in the output PDF has lost quality and when printed out, the white background (which should be white) prints as as a light shade of grey.
Does anyone know how to stop the loss of quality on the image and how to stop the background of the image printing as light grey ?
I'm running Report Builder 10.1.2.0.2.
Many Thanks, Mark

This document explains how to increase the image resolution when exporting:
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/30407084-c51d-2b10-1f81-813488350e6f
But it's for Crystal Enterprise 8.0, do you know if Crystal Reports 11 will work the same way?

Image Quality In Crystal Reports for Visual Studio 2010

I am using the new production release of Crystal Reports for Visual Studio 2010 and I am having an issue with image quality when adding an image to a crystal report.
The image itself is a .TIF file, and when opened in Windows, the quality of the image, which is mostly text, is very high. The image was created from a electronic PDF form and I intend to use this as a background for the crystal report, over which I will place data fields.
As soon as the image is added to the report you can see the degradation in quality in the design window and in the preview window within visual studio. The quality remains low when viewing the report in the WPF report viewer and when printing from this control.
I have ensured the "Retain Original Image Color Depth" option is checked but this has made no difference (the image is black and white anyway).
The image in the report has been left at its native size, no resizing at all. The image is 355KB in size if that's relevant.
Is there a reason the image looses quality when added to a report? Is it being compressed? More importantly, is there a way to make the image retain its native quality when adding it to a crystal report?
Thanks in advance.

The following image is the image I am trying to display. Although imageshack has converted it to a png, if you right click and save the image you can open it and zoom in with little image degradation.
http://img132.imageshack.us/i/j301.png
The following is a screen shot of how the tif file looks in the designer when zooming in:
http://img138.imageshack.us/i/j30lowquantity.jpg
The second image has lost its clarity and is unusable when printing.
I hope this helps.

Crystal Reports Developer 11 - image quality in exported pdf file

I need to create a report with many images and export it to a pdf file. The image quality in the pdf file is slightly lower than in the rpt file. Can someone tell me how to increase the image quality in pdf file?
Thanks,
Hong

This document explains how to increase the image resolution when exporting:
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/30407084-c51d-2b10-1f81-813488350e6f
But it's for Crystal Enterprise 8.0, do you know if Crystal Reports 11 will work the same way?

Image quality and report size

Hello,
I have a problem in the export to PDF document. I use CR 10.2 with Visual Studio 2005 in a web application.
My problem is that I have a report of photographies, in wich I need an aceptable image quality. I don´t show the report in an report viewer, I create the report document and export it to PDF sending the memorystram in the http reponse.
Firstly I see that the PDF document image quality was so bad. Then I checked the report property "Retain original color depth", and the image quality was good, but the PDF size was too big, two photographies of about 2MB(each one) generates a PDF file of about 20MB size.
I need to send the pdf files to the clients via email, but the files are so big, and if the cllient inserts 10 photographies, the report size would be of about 100MB. Is there any wallkaround to this issue?. Is there this issue fixed in crystal reports XI?
Best regards

See [this|Crystal to PDF; thread. As unsatisfactory as the answer may be, it is what it is...
I believe R&D is looking at this issue, but as an enhancement for a future release of CR.
Ludek

Saved Image Quality

Hello all,
I was just wondering if other people have noticed a drop in quality for saved images. Anything I save from Safari or Mail looks terrible once it gets to Photos - blurry and pixelated.
Not sure if there's a fix or not yet.

Update: Oct.5th
For those of you still in the dark about this issue, I discovered it's not a hardware issue as much as an OS one.
I noticed a problem with saving JPG images from either an e-mail attachment or via Safari from my iPod Touch 2nd Gen. The image in the Saved Images folder will render as a pixelated image when you preview it. BUT, when you download the image to your desktop, it appears in its original full size and also sharp in quality. (My example was approximately 1024 x 768 w/ a 300kb size).
I took mine into an Apple store and the Genius Bar tech assistant and I were able to determine that it's because the Touch cannot preview/optimize a downloaded hi-res image with anything that exceeds the 320 x 240 resolution of the iPod. You can test this by saving an image from the web that is around that scale. When you preview it, you should see the image load up very crisp.
He said it's a relatively new problem and that he was hopeful the next firmware update would fix the issue. He was stumped though as to how come the iPhone was able to save images from the web and preview in crisp detail. This apparently is unique to the new iPod Touches.
Either way, since mine was still under warranty I asked for an exchange and he gladly did the transaction.
When I got home and opened up my new one (which had 2.1.1 firmware already installed) I tried saving a hi-res image and unfortunately, encountered the same issue. So it's definitely an OS issue.
Hope this helps clear up any worries or confusion.

Does flattening (or saving without layers) compromise the image QUALITY?

I'm saving a large .tiff image with multiple layers, but have no need to access the different layers later on, so my question is simply if I can save the image without layers in order to reduce size, or would that also reduce the image QUALITY?

Flattening merges all the layers and gives it a white background, the layer is then named background and is locked. Whereas merge keeps a transparent background if there is one, the remaining layer is not locked.
A flattened image will crop any image data that falls outside the document area. So technically it does effect the quality. The same as what a crop would do.
However it does not adjust the documents image size.
A merged document leaves the image data outside the document area untouched.
That said, some formats like jpg flatten the file not merge it. As it does not support transparency nor layers. Png does not support layers therefore outer data is cropped. But tiff and psd will keep outer data as both of these formats support transparency and layers. Transparency is required to stop the file from being flattened and layers is required to keep any image data that falls outside the document area from being cropped.

FM9: terrible image quality when saving a .fm page as .htm page...

Hello,
I have several framemaker pages I want to save as html pages.
The problem I have concerns the quality of images...
The images I import have a good quality but once I save the page as .htm, Framemaker automatically resizes it and duplicates the image under another name..
Framemaker may not be the best tool to produce html pages but I also need to produce a PDF version of these pages...:-/
I have tried to import .png files, .jpeg files but everytime the result is as bad as before in the .html version..
So far the only solution I have found is to use Dreamweaver to resize the images by hand but it may become a tedious work since I have a lot of images....
Do you have an idea how to obtain a good image quality result in .html?
Do you think I am not using the appropriate tool to do this?
Thank you very much in advance
Anna

Anna,
FM's html export is quite simplistic and lacks many controls.
If you need to get good html from FM, then consider using Omni Systems mif2go (see: http://www.omsys.com/dcl/mif2gopg.htm ). It can be set to use the original import files so no unintended conversions take place. Once you've configured the settings to your liking, it's a simple click and convert for production use. The evaluation version is fully functional and doesn't time out - it just does some random word shuffling so the output wouldn't be usable as a reliable reference.

Losing Image quality when saving to JPeg and posting on line! Please Help.

Hi,
I recently got a new computer. I use CS3 to edit. For some reason, whenever I resize the image, save it as a Jpeg and post it to the web, it loses image quality. Severely. I've never had this problem before....until this new computer.
I usually resize the image to 800, then simply click on Save as Jpeg. Once I resize, it looks fine CS3, but NOT online.
Just a picture of my kid. No critiques please! : )

For blog software, you will have to look under Manage under your admin account. There's an option to define the maximum image size for previews (inline images) and medium image sizes. if they are set to samll, the software will resize them, yet the theme you use may scale them up again to full column width, so they look mooshy. Make sure the image size in the settings panel matches the images you upload. For Facebook it may be similar, but I won't rule out that eitehr of the two services frcibly will change your images to save bandwidth. This should be stated in their terms of use somewhere. If you're merely referring to color shifts, you may wish to check your default color settings and the Embed color profile and Preserve RGB options in the Save for web and Devices dialog.
Mylenium

IPhoto is changing resolution and image quality

I am currently and for the first time using iPhoto 6 to produce a book - a feature within the application. I have edited my images in Photoshop, some have not needed to be so they have simply been saved as either high-res JPGS or TIFFS. On importing them into iPhoto selected images are downsizing and stating that they are not big enough to print - this I know is not true as they are adequatley large enough for printing to A0 minimum at 300 dpi. There are also a select few that are changing in image quality - the colours are looking either bleached out or over-exposed and they have lost their original quality. When opening the exact files in Photoshop they are correctly exposed, perfect colours, sizes etc. If I am to try and 'retouch' them within iPhoto I can resume some of their quality but it seems through the transition into importing inot the application they are being corrupted.
Can anyone assist me as its driving me mad!!!
Thanks

What is the color space of the photos in photoshop?
In iPhoto Preferences, Advanced, do you have it set to add ColorSync Profile?
BTW, the 72 ppi (pixels per inch) is irrelevant. iPhoto defaults to reporting 72 ppi because that is a typical screen resolution. What's important is the total pixel dimensions of the image, and whether that size gives you an adequate dpi (dots per inch) when printed at the designated print size. So, while the image looks great on-screen in photoshop, that doesn't mean that it will be adequate for printing in a book. But you are right - you shouldn't see a significant shift in color when importing into iPhoto.
Regards.

Poor image quality in export to powerpoint

When I export a presentation to powerpoint format, the image quality of some elements is poor. Is there any way to preserve the image quality upon export?

Hello Ido:
Here is a paste of the last communication I had over email with Fergus:
When using photoshop, save the files a BMPs.
When .jpg image is inserted into Crystal Reports it is converted into bitmap format and as the
result of the conversion the report may loose some quality and scale.
When an image is saved as a .bmp, then there is no conversion required and thus the quality
of the image should be preserved.
Best practice: save the image with high resolution and required size as a .bmp format then
insert this image into Crystal Reports.
One more thing. Many people like to use jpg files as they are smaller than bmp files. However,
as far as Crystal Reports is concerned, this is inconsequential. The report file will be the same
size if a file is inserted as a jpg or a bmp. This is due to the jpg conversion to bmp Crystal Reports
does internally.
I am not sure if that helped, but Fergus did say that he was going to adjust his approach to how he handles the images. Hopefully that did help. And many thanks for bringing up the Fergus thread. I'll update it with the above info.
Ludek
Follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/SAPCRNetSup
Got Enhancement ideas? Try the [SAP Idea Place|https://ideas.sap.com/community/products_and_solutions/crystalreports]

Image quality lost through editing with Photoshop?

I find a number of professionals using Lightroom as their primary photo editor.
I did a search on Lightroom vs Photoshop. I found the following listed as the first reason for choosing Lightroom: 1. Nondestructive Editing. Nothing is actually changed (by Lightroom) in an image until it is exported. This means you can make an adjustment, change it again and again, but no quality is lost as it would be with Photoshp. This is reported in Outdoor Photographer.
My impression is there is no lost of image quality in Photoshop if you are working on a layer copy of the Background. Photoshop tries to prevent degradation of the original image by requiring it be copied or otherwise freed before the background can be changed.
Image quality can be lost in downstream layers through processes such as changing image size.
Is my statement correct about loss of image quality and the 'analyst' from Outdoor Photographer misstating things?

Hi Vince.
I am just learning my way around Photoshp. I have spent 18 months learning how to start and to stop it.
Good point. But if we peg the learning curve of Ps at 10, Lr comes in around 2 or 3. Like learning to drive a car as opposed to learning to fly a jet.
Smart Objects would make PS more re-editable.
True, but still no match for Lr or Ps RAW.
I have never before seens a comment that extensive work on an image in PS would deteriorate the quality of the image.
Extensive work will do what the user asks it to do. In the first 18 months I had Ps, I asked it to do lots of things that I now realize deteriorated my images. Forever.
Regarding LR, I have created for me a workflow that requires PS.
So did everyone before Lr came out. And yet, Ps users by the thousands, if not millions, have adopted Lr. Many if not most with a greater time investment in Ps than 18 months. I dropped my Ps centric flo the moment I realized what Lr could do. I had been using Ps pretty heavily for about 5 years by that time.
I feel LR works best for experienced photographers who are shoooting a lot of pictures.
While it's true that experienced photographers might realize more benifit, maybe not. It works great for everyone.
That person has good images, images that need little editing, to start the output process.
This is not true in the sense that the majority of Lr users are mediocre photographers at best. For the simple fact that most photographers (even "pros") are mediocre at best. And Lr was conceived with these folks in mind. It has the true "pro" stuff, but in an amateur friendly environment. Judging by the images and questions posted on photo and Lr forums, there are many, many, low level photographers using it.
I am an inexperienced photographer shooting just a few pictures. So I put a lot of effort into getting a good print from my mediocre shots.
You obviously care about your images. Care more when you are shooting them. This is boiler plate advice. Time spent mastering your camera will pay off better dividends than learning to fix bad photos. This was true before the digital age, and it's just as true now. Ultimately, no matter how hard you massage it in Ps, Lr, or any other app, the quality of your final image will be a function of the quality of the original pixels you captured with you camera.
So far as masks and all the rest, Lr has an Local Area Adjustment Brush which does just that. You paint the mask, complete with any number or combination of adjustments, with a brush. The mask and the adjustments to it can be easily changed later. A good spot removal tool. A great red eye tool.
File size isn't a huge factor these days, but it still counts. Instead of layers and the pixel data for each of them as in Ps, Lr has the pixel data once, and a sidecar file with the adjustments settings in a much smaller file. Not a big deal for storage, but when rendering, maybe a bigger deal. Lr also pre-renders previews at various sizes (you can program this, plus how long it keeps them). I could go on and on (and I have).
Bottom line, it's a great tool for anyone who takes photos. For the price, it's a no brainer for $150. If you have the $150. Not true for many of us these days.
Anyway, Vince, I hope you don't think I'm picking on you. I answered you in detail because you made such good points. And the answers might be of general interest.
Peace,
Lee

Secondary Display image quality is poor (at 1:1) in Library module

I'm not a frequent user of the Secondary Display feature, so I can't say state whether this particular issue is new in 2.3RC or if it also was seen in a previous version. I submitted a bug report since I searched but did not find any previous mention of this sort of thing. Anyone else notice this?
Here's my problem: When I'm using LR's Develop module and activate the Secondary Display (SD) window, the SD images for all zoom ratios seem identical in quality (sharpness. color) to the images seen in the main screen--as expected. However when I switch over to Library module and use 1:1 zoom, the SD image becomes relatively degraded (i.e., quite blurry/pixelated) compared to the main window. When SD is set at the lower zoom ratios (still in Library module) its quality seems fine--i.e., more or less indistinguishable from the main screen. It's only when SD is used at 1:1 in the Library module that it appears "buggy".
I'm using a Mac Power PC G4, OSX 10.4.11.
Phil
P.S. I should mention that the image quality at 1:1 zoom in Library Module's Secondary Display is not only worse than the main Library screen, it's also significantly worse (less sharp) than seen in the Develop module--and that's certainly not unexpected.

>Gordon McKinney:What happens is the second display doesn't render a 1:1 for optimal sharpness.
For me it isn't just sharpness. I can make a change that is fairly radical and have it show up immediately in the main monitor--both in the navigation panel and in the main display panel. The image on the 2nd monitor remains unchanged.
If I then use the history panel to move back to the previous state and then re-select the final state the image on the secondary display
usually, not always gets updated. Sometimes it takes a 2nd or a third cycle from previous to latest history state. This 'missed update' in the 2nd monitor doesn't happen 100% of the time, but it does happen quite often.
LR 2.3RC, Vista Ultimate x64, 8GB DRAM, nVidia 9800 GTX+ with latest drivers.

Re-saving a report deteriorates image quality

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for