before our designer gave image [.webp ] with below details :

enter image description here

We felt image clarity is bad, so we told to give higher dimension images because we thought it will improve clarity. designer gave new image, but still the clarity is same. is anything we can do for improving clarity ?

enter image description here

above is .jpg image

enter image description here

  • Speak to your designer. Tell them what you need the image for, and the size it needs to be reproduced at.
    – Billy Kerr
    Nov 9 at 13:03
  • @BillyKerr designer gave the correct size and dimension. but problem is image clarity not improved after eventhough he gave new image. both first and second image clarity is same
    – profile 1
    Nov 9 at 13:04
  • Share the image. Can't tell you anything without seeing it.
    – Billy Kerr
    Nov 9 at 13:05
  • i have updated the question with image @BillyKerr
    – profile 1
    Nov 9 at 13:11
  • The image looks perfectly fine and clear at 100%. Are you zooming into the image? You can't zoom into a raster image more than 100% or will not look sharp. Also check your computer does not have some system zooming applied.
    – Billy Kerr
    Nov 9 at 13:13

2 Answers 2


You have to define what "clarity" means for you.

You probably mean sharp. I think the banner is well done, but the photo of the girl's ear is lower resolution than the rest. I don't know if the resolution of the photo is for the original request, and we see it as a lower resolution because of the change in the specification you made.

The only solution would be to use a higher-resolution photo.

There are some algorithms that increase the resolution but "smear" a bit of the texture.


Nothing increases the real accuracy, adjustments only can rediredt the attention or compensate something which is inserted earlier and reduces the accuracy.

The jewel metal has poor contrast against the skin. Some more southern type skin color would give more room to the jewel to be seen clearly. The other images in seller's website really have models who have darker skin colors.

The jewel on the ear looks blurry and dirty. The adjacent one is much cleaner. But it's also substantially larger, so the available image size in pixels on the screen allows it to be much sharper. No idea how much of the dirt and blurriness of the jewel is caused by the photographer and what's inserted afterwards in not so successful editing attempts. The original RAW shot would be useful to be seen.

Fixing the bad one is not possible by adding local contrast. It becomes even more dirty (tested). The photographer must take a good sharp shot which has enough light on the jewel, but doesn't blow the skin white. A darker skin color would make it easier.

Another approach is to insert a separately photographed jewel or even a well rendered 3D model into the photo of the model.

Just to test how good contrast this small (in pixels) image could have with the original northern type skin color I drew a simplified fake and inserted it on your original image. The old jewel is roughly wiped off. The result:

enter image description here

High zoom in reveals that the metal is only a few pixels wide. The illusion of the metal comes from the mixture of red and white zones:

enter image description here

There's white and nearly fully saturated red. No dark cannot be inserted to the metal because it would look dirt, as your own image shows. There's not enough pixels for it, no matter it works in the adjacent big jewel. The only way to get more contrast is to make the background darker. Actually it's already used by inserting a shadow.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.