Why is Facebook so mean to my photos :(

[hibou]

Facebook has always had lousy compression but ever since I started shooting in RAW I notice that anything I upload looks reaaaaaaaaally gross.

Not very interesting but similar type photos for comparison purposes

Shot in JPEG and hosted on flickr and on Facebook

VERSUS

Shot in RAW and converted to JPG hosted on flickr and on Facebook

See?

Everybody knows I'm a photographer so having everything looks so hideously noisy and desaturated grates the nerves. Anybody know what's up here? Experience the same thing?

[Austin_HXC]

Well, compression means smaller files means less harddrive space needed, means less money.

It's all about money.

[RolandAA]

When I get properties on them Facebook's bigger image is 51KB and the Flickr's smaller image is 165kb. More than 3 times the data in a smaller area = visual goodness. In Facebook's defense they are a social networking site not a photo site.

[windrider86]

Because its just facebook

[chele_arts_and_designs]

When I edit I save the same image in multiple sizes, and there is always a web version with my signature on it, much smaller jpeg. It seems to work so far and takes lot less time to upload to Facebook, and God know I have tons of pictures on Facebook..lol

[Photostudent]

As the others alluded to, Facebook reduces the quality of the jpeg to make the file size smaller. Even though they reduce the file size, you may still notice that images that were originally of a high quality (in terms of Megapixels and file size) take longer to load. However, if you are a professional photographer you may want to think twice about putting your high-res pics on FB based on their terms.

For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos ("IP content"), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook ("IP License"). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.
When you delete IP content, it is deleted in a manner similar to emptying the recycle bin on a computer. However, you understand that removed content may persist in backup copies for a reasonable period of time (but will not be available to others).
When you add an application and use Platform, your content and information is shared with the application. We require applications to respect your privacy settings, but your agreement with that application will control how the application can use the content and information you share. (To learn more about Platform, read our About Platform page.)

[hibou]

I was not keen on the idea of saving even more copies of these photos but that seems to be the solution.

Originally Posted by windrider86

Because its just facebook

super reply

[Free]

It's economics - with more that 150 million users on Facebook any given day and more that 2.5 BILLION photos uploaded EVERY month every byte saved adds up to big dollar savings. By compressing images to oblivion they are saving themselves heaps of cash!

[hibou]

Originally Posted by Photostudent

As the others alluded to, Facebook reduces the quality of the jpeg to make the file size smaller. Even though they reduce the file size, you may still notice that images that were originally of a high quality (in terms of Megapixels and file size) take longer to load. However, if you are a professional photographer you may want to think twice about putting your high-res pics on FB based on their terms.

For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos ("IP content"), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook ("IP License"). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.
When you delete IP content, it is deleted in a manner similar to emptying the recycle bin on a computer. However, you understand that removed content may persist in backup copies for a reasonable period of time (but will not be available to others).

Thanks for the info but I am not really concerned about whatever nefarious intentions Facebook has for photos of my dinners and my cats. I am just concerned that said photos look like crapola.

(Plus uh, not convinced tht non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensble, royalty-free license on Facebook is significantly different from the risks inherent in posting photos online anywhere.)

Originally Posted by Free

It's economics - with more that 150 million users on Facebook any given day and more that 2.5 BILLION photos uploaded EVERY month every byte saved adds up to big dollar savings. By compressing images to oblivion they are saving themselves heaps of cash!

Yes... I know the photos are compressed. I said as much in the OP. I know that it saves money, too.

My question was why do RAW-shot images look worse than JPG-shot images, and the answer, per RolandAA is so simple I don't know why I didn't think of it - RAW photos are way bigger = more compressed. Thread solved, thanks Roland.

[CanonRebelz]

Facebook downgrades the quality to like 400x600 I think?
Saves em bandwith, less bandwith, less money spent.
As said before, its alll about the mullah