Resizing photo results in terrible quality?

Question

I hope this isn't a really, really dumb question but.... is there any reason exporting a resized image should result in the photo itself displaying as poor quality? Hope it's okay I post a link.... when I allow ProPhoto to resize my photo down to 960px it looks perfect. When I export and choose to resize the long edge to 960px it looks soft.... Are my eyes deceiving me or something?? Here's the example: Test post » Tara Polly Photography

Answer 1

Have you ever used a mac?
Have you ever checked dpi\ppi settings after an export in photoshop, preview or even with lightroom?  Have you compared the photos of similar export resolution dimension, but different PPI\DPI?  It isn't just about printing.
Lower dpi\ppi values in my outputs had drastically different characteristics than those of "properly" (must be politically correct with respect to other comments here) resized images that kept this value in the same ratio as the original or at a higher value.  JPG is a compressed and LOSSY format.  Resolution dimension is also important, as it will define the optimal display dimension (with regard to the on screen size or how big the image will appear at a given dimension of pixels), but dpi\ppi will alter the amount of data used to represent color and detail within that area.  That is why it DOES MATTER.  I've tested it and viewed on several screens at several resolutions, just now in fact, and it confirms what I learned in class 10 years ago when I was studying the differences in celluloid and digital photos. 
I took a picture.  The original image shows 600 dpi, I drop it down to half size, and drop to 300 ppi\dpi (yes I use them interchangeably; one refers to Pixels\points per inch, the other dots per inch, one refers to inkjet print, the other to the pixel points used in the actual image file, and both are related to print at opposite ends; one also affects the actual file in the computer itself), and there isn't much of a change with bilinear (nearest neighbor) though it is a little smoother in non-edge areas, but perceptually, it is almost indistinguishable.  I bumped it up to 450 and resampled the image again.  That smoothness was still there in some areas of similar color, but where it altered at light\shadow was a little sharper on a 50inch tv set up as a second monitor at 1920x1080 with an image sized to 50% in preview.  SO.... ...I have proven it to me.
Your interpolation method needs to fit your purpose as well.  Photoshop lets you choose from several in the export for web dialogue.  Not sure about lightroom as I haven't found the need for it other than with printing and storing originals.  Currently photoshop uses a (sharper)\(smoother) keyword, smoother being bilinear nearest neighbor, similar to the mac Preview program.
From class
Change the number of little dots used to express the image of any given dimension, and you'll effectively change the sharpness and noise characteristics of that image.  When you go to print, you want to be able to use the least amount of these dots for professional print companies to use, and for your own, you want to match it to your physical printer.  This means you can make a duplicate at the correct number of dots\points and then sharpen that for your print.  You can sharpen for screens the same way, but most people prefer to resize the dimensions to decrease file size, so that they don't have to adjust as much afterward.
That was 10 years ago.  Today, you adjust afterward either way, or you get it right in the dialogue that comes up.