| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/10/2004 01:57:12 PM · #1 |
I usually shoot in large, fine JPG mode and sometimes in RAW. In RAW mode the image is approx. 6" x 9" at 300 dpi and in JPG mode it is 41" x 27". When you resample the JPG to 300 dpi it is of course about the same dimensions as the RAW file. I would like to use some images for actual lithographic printing but at a larger finished size than 6" x 9". Is there an easy way to increase the dimensions in PS6 while keeping it at 300 dpi and not losing quality?
|
|
|
|
08/10/2004 02:06:43 PM · #2 |
i have a plug-in for photoshop that does a decent job of it and is easier to do than incrementally increasing size manually. Its called extensis pixel smartscale. Here's a link to 30 day trial:
pxl_smartscale
|
|
|
|
08/10/2004 02:11:04 PM · #3 |
You can resample images in Photoshop, go to image/image size and resize it in small 10% steps, not in one go. You can also use plugins as said before.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2004 02:12:35 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by amason:
You can resample images in Photoshop, go to image/image size and resize it in small 10% steps, not in one go. You can also use plugins as said before. |
The new resize options in Photoshop CS are supposed to eliminate the need to upsize in increments; I believe the option is "Bicubic Smoothing".
Message edited by author 2004-08-10 14:16:24. |
|
|
|
08/10/2004 02:17:00 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by richterrell:
Originally posted by amason:
You can resample images in Photoshop, go to image/image size and resize it in small 10% steps, not in one go. You can also use plugins as said before. |
The new resize options in Photoshop CS are supposed to eliminate the need to upsize in increments; I believe the option is "Bicubic Smoothing" or something similar. |
Thanks for the info. Rick has PS6, so he has to upsize in increments.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2004 02:17:37 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by amason:
Originally posted by richterrell:
Originally posted by amason:
You can resample images in Photoshop, go to image/image size and resize it in small 10% steps, not in one go. You can also use plugins as said before. |
The new resize options in Photoshop CS are supposed to eliminate the need to upsize in increments; I believe the option is "Bicubic Smoothing" or something similar. |
Thanks for the info. Rick has PS6, so he has to upsize in increments. |
Oops - missed that part in his original post! |
|
|
|
08/10/2004 02:35:42 PM · #7 |
| So if I want to print a 6 megapixel image at 16x20, will I get better results if I resample to a larger image size before sending the image to the photo service? How do I know the best resolution/size to make it? |
|
|
|
08/10/2004 02:58:43 PM · #8 |
| I've perssonally found that prints at 300 dpi and 300 dpi are *nearly* identical from most processes. I recommend finding out if your service bureau will accept 150 dpi... otherwise, scale away and view the results for yourself, then decide for future reference. Good luck! |
|
|
|
08/10/2004 02:59:49 PM · #9 |
| That said, so this with resampling OFF in your image size menu... also ask the lab what their thoughts are! |
|
|
|
08/10/2004 03:45:10 PM · #10 |
DPC Prints* will accept/approve images for commercial output as long as they are 150 dpi at final print size, and otherwise of good quality. 300 dpi is the supposed ideal.
Images with lots of detail (trees/leaves) upsample relatively poorly; those with large areas of smooth/gradient colors (sunsets) will usually have no problem being made larger.
*Check Blaze of Glory for an example of an enlarged image which was approved. Because of the smooth nature of the bulk of the image I think I just doubled the size in IrfanView in one shot -- no Photoshop involved in that step. |
|
|
|
08/10/2004 03:48:08 PM · #11 |
More and more online services are getting pretty good at doing the upsizing for you. //www.jumbogiant.com/services/process.html is one example that I have read good things about and there are many more that I haven't tested. This keeps the file size smaller and faster for uploading which benefits everyone.
I happen to be a bit of a control freak when it comes to my photos and I prefer to enlarge the images myself. I've experimented with my images extensively and have come up with some sharpening actions that seem to work well on the images from my camera and then I have pretty much settled on the PScs Bicubic Smoother method for upsizing the images. I usually run the images through Noise Ninja prior to any editing to provide a real clean image to start with. I created an action that sharpens mainly the edges of the image while, at the same time, minumizing the halo effects and I like to apply this action very judiciously before I upsize and then again, if needed, after I have enlarged the image. With this method, since I am only primarily sharpening the edges of the image in a very specific way, I am not magnifying any remaining image noise or artifacts. On many images I don't need to sharpen any further after I have upsized with the Bicbic Smoother method because it does such a good job. When I enlarge an image to a very large size like 20x30 or something ridiculous it is not always important to me that everything is razor sharp but rather that everything look smooth and consistent without any distracting artifacts. I think it makes for a more realistic look. This is why I prefer to sharpen a little bit mainly to just the edges prior to upsizing because you are simply increasing edge contrast anyways which gives it that illusion of more detail. Then when you keep the image smooth and clean using the Bicubic Smoother method in addition to that you can get a pretty effective illusion of a detailed image even when you technically could not add any more detail. It's definitely a personal preference and many images require a slightly different treatment.
Many people swear against any kind of sharpening prior to upsizing but my reasoning is that I am getting the image as close to perfect at it's original size first. Like having a perfect negative to start with. The trick is not to overdo it. This works best with images that contain a lot of detail but an image, like a portrait, I probably would not need to sharpen at all prior to enlarging.
T
Message edited by author 2004-08-10 15:51:44.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2004 03:57:18 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by timj351:
... I created an action that sharpens only the edges of the image while, at the same time, minumizing the halo effects ... |
Properly applied UnSharp Mask is supposed to produce the same effect ... useful if you don't have a copy of Tim's action.
One key is raising the Threshhold setting. I see most people setting it to very low numbers (like 1). This number determines "how different" two colors have to be before USM is applied. With a very low number, colors which are almost alike will have USM applied, accentuating their differences and possibly leading to artifacts.
A higher setting (I use 5-7) tells USM that the colors have to be "quite different" (i.e. an "edge") before the USM effect is applied.
Also, a large radius setting can lead to the halo effect, by extending the effect too far into the color areas.
Some examples of USM application are in this gallery at pBase.
Message edited by author 2004-08-10 16:00:03. |
|
|
|
08/10/2004 04:22:10 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by timj351:
... I created an action that sharpens only the edges of the image while, at the same time, minumizing the halo effects ... |
Properly applied UnSharp Mask is supposed to produce the same effect ... useful if you don't have a copy of Tim's action.
One key is raising the Threshhold setting. I see most people setting it to very low numbers (like 1). This number determines "how different" two colors have to be before USM is applied. With a very low number, colors which are almost alike will have USM applied, accentuating their differences and possibly leading to artifacts.
A higher setting (I use 5-7) tells USM that the colors have to be "quite different" (i.e. an "edge") before the USM effect is applied.
Also, a large radius setting can lead to the halo effect, by extending the effect too far into the color areas.
Some examples of USM application are in this gallery at pBase. |
Thanks. I should have pointed that out that there many sharpening methods that work well. The trick is to find the one that works the best with your particular images. My images have a slight problem with haloing effects even with in-camera sharpening set low and so I have to pay particular attention to not enhancing that effect any more. Image noise is also an issue that I have to try to control.
If anyone is interested in trying out these actions please PM me with your email address and I will send them to you. I can't guarentee ideal results from every camera and with individual tastes but you might find them fun to play around with. I don't want to take this too far off topic but using the right sharpening methods does go hand in hand with enlarging images properly.
T
|
|
|
|
08/10/2004 04:26:52 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by timj351:
... My images have a slight problem with haloing effects even with in-camera sharpening set low and so I have to pay particular attention to not enhancing that effect any more. |
Blaze of Glory does seem to exhibit some haloing effect, now that you mention it ... : )
Message edited by author 2004-08-10 16:27:12. |
|
|
|
08/10/2004 04:45:45 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by timj351:
... My images have a slight problem with haloing effects even with in-camera sharpening set low and so I have to pay particular attention to not enhancing that effect any more. |
Blaze of Glory does seem to exhibit some haloing effect, now that you mention it ... : ) |
Too funny ;)
T
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 11:46:08 PM EDT.
