Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I've seen many references to downsizing to increase visible sharpness in a questionable image.  I've never done this, but the time has come to incorporate it into my workflow--only when necessary, of course.  I'm currently tossing away some images that I think can be saved. 

 

There are countless 'methods' described on the web for doing this, some quite complicated.

 

Would appreciate a description of your preferred technique for downsizing.   Is it simply opening in PS and reducing the pixel dimensions of the image, or is there more to it than that? 

 

Shooting with a Canon 5D mark 4 most of the time, which yields 6720 X 4480.

 

Thanks,

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In LR you just set the resize in the export dialogue. I have presets for it.

I have one which reduces by about 20% linear (4500 from a 5456 original) and one at just over the minimum, 3250. As you say, only when essential. If you weren't sure what will pass QC you wouldn't be asking the question.

I noticed recently that I was tending to downsize everything to 4500, so I've cut back on it. It's not the worst of habits, I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

In LR you just set the resize in the export dialogue. I have presets for it.

I have one which reduces by about 20% linear (4500 from a 5456 original) and one at just over the minimum, 3250. As you say, only when essential. If you weren't sure what will pass QC you wouldn't be asking the question.

Thanks, SC.  I think I'm going to use PS, at least for now, so I can review what I'm doing before export. 

With more experience, I may not feel it necessary.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you will notice any difference between downsizing in Photoshop or exporting to the same pixel dimensions in Lightroom. Out of habit I tend to do it in Photoshop and leave the resample method to automatic which for downsizing will be Bicubic Sharper. Lightroom does it all behind the scenes. I use Lightroom export when I want to downsize and control the metatdata that accompanies the file, something that can't be done easily in Photoshop as far as I know.

 

Of course if you are having to downsize a lot to sharpen images, then you need to consider your technique and/or lenses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MDM said:

I don't think you will notice any difference between downsizing in Photoshop or exporting to the same pixel dimensions in Lightroom. Out of habit I tend to do it in Photoshop and leave the resample method to automatic which for downsizing will be Bicubic Sharper. Lightroom does it all behind the scenes. I use Lightroom export when I want to downsize and control the metatdata that accompanies the file, something that can't be done easily in Photoshop as far as I know.

 

Of course if you are having to downsize a lot to sharpen images, then you need to consider your technique and/or lenses. 

 

Thanks, MDM.

Though they may achieve the same results, I find it easier to examine the results while still in PS, and in saving back to LR. 

I'm working with a new camera, lens, and also shooting more motion than I have in the past, so I'm in kind of a complex experimental mode, and want to be able to fiddle with, and look carefully at, whatever I do in LR/PS. 

 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My downsizing is for high ISO noise, or less than idea lens aperture. Not for shaky hand holding.

 

I Photoshop downsize my Sony RX100 20 megapixel files to 14 megapixels when ISO 125 (the native ISO) and 12 megapixels when ISO 400.

 

I may also do the 12 megapixel downsizing on the Sony when shooting at 125 ISO at less than optimum lens aperture.

 

I do not try to downsize to sharpen hand held motion blur on any of my cameras. I discard the image instead. It is a kind of punishment so I will up my quality game.

 

On a 50 megapixel Canon 5Ds I will downsize to 12 megapixel for ISO 6400. No downsizing for ISO 400. Downsize to 35 megapixel for ISO 800. Downsize to 35 megapixel when shooting at F2-F4.

 

For all of the above I end up with the same sharp, noise free images, when viewed at 100%. They just cannot be enlarged beyond the reduced megapixel limit at 300 DPI.
 

Sony DX100 ideal conditions, ISO 125, best aperture, 20 megapixel downsized to 14 megapixel. Straight Royalty Free because people or property not featured.
M7RF98.jpg

 

Sony DX100 bad conditions ISO 400, not best aperture, major correction for colour cast, 20 downsized to 12 megapixel. Royalty Free but editorial only, because of famous cattle property.
 

R0PCMA.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Bill,

 

On downsizing for sharpness it is for aperture and high ISO.  If the image is not sharp downsizing is not going

the make it sharp.  

 

You need to drink " Sharpenal "while processing "unsharp" images and always write your IPTC info before drinking

the Sharpenal.......

 

Chuck 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, MilesbeforeIsleep said:

240 or 300 dpi for downsized image?  I've always exported from LR at 300dpi. 

 

It's ppi not dpi and it's irrelevant except when you are printing. It's only  the pixel count that matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't generally downsize, but I am likely to be using high ISO in a forthcoming event and want to create a LR preset using the Alamy Lightroom Bridge plugin to reduce marginally. Just to make sure I have got the menus right, I am presuming that I should reduce both the minimum and maximum file sizes in the upload menu from its default settings, ie change minimum from 25 to 17. Not sure what maximum I should choose to get the desired effect. My images are typically 36-45Mb, so presume I would need to set maximum to less than this. Here is the menu with its default settings.

 

https://goo.gl/rsHwHb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Sally said:

I don't generally downsize, but I am likely to be using high ISO in a forthcoming event and want to create a LR preset using the Alamy Lightroom Bridge plugin to reduce marginally. Just to make sure I have got the menus right, I am presuming that I should reduce both the minimum and maximum file sizes in the upload menu from its default settings, ie change minimum from 25 to 17. Not sure what maximum I should choose to get the desired effect. My images are typically 36-45Mb, so presume I would need to set maximum to less than this. Here is the menu with its default settings.

 

https://goo.gl/rsHwHb

I use LR5 so I don't have this on the dialogue. Just below "file settings" I have "image sizing" and I just set long side to 3250px, which is just over the minimum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, spacecadet said:

I use LR5 so I don't have this on the dialogue. Just below "file settings" I have "image sizing" and I just set long side to 3250px, which is just over the minimum.

Its a menu in the Alamy Lightroom Bridge plugin, not LR's own menus.  I use the plugin to upload directly to Alamy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I normally downsize using the option to resize during export in LR. For changing size later on a JPG file I use the excellent Faststone Image viewer (free) software, it is also a great general viewing tool and can be use for some simple editing like dust spot removal.

 

While on the subject of downsizing, is there a "sweet spot" resolution for Alamy? Is it worthwhile uploading files a lot larger than the minimum size? My "in use" cameras produce files of 24MP, 30MP, 42MP, 51MP and 80MP, the larger files may be a bit of an overkill?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rudix said:

I normally downsize using the option to resize during export in LR. For changing size later on a JPG file I use the excellent Faststone Image viewer (free) software, it is also a great general viewing tool and can be use for some simple editing like dust spot removal.

 

While on the subject of downsizing, is there a "sweet spot" resolution for Alamy? Is it worthwhile uploading files a lot larger than the minimum size? My "in use" cameras produce files of 24MP, 30MP, 42MP, 51MP and 80MP, the larger files may be a bit of an overkill?

 

Does downsizing not limit the usability of the files for customers?  It seems one would want to upload the largest possible file size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MilesbeforeIsleep said:

Does downsizing not limit the usability of the files for customers?  It seems one would want to upload the largest possible file size.

That is what I was thinking but not sure, VERY new here (1 week!)
I was playing with a RAW file the other day of 168MP, almost 1GB in size, poor computer..... I think I saw somewhere that there was a 100MP limit? Maybe it was another agent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Rudix said:

That is what I was thinking but not sure, VERY new here (1 week!)
I was playing with a RAW file the other day of 168MP, almost 1GB in size, poor computer..... I think I saw somewhere that there was a 100MP limit? Maybe it was another agent.

Yes, there would appear to be a 100 limit as suggested by the default settings in Alamy Lightroom bridge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Stephen Dwyer said:

Im wondering if we can get some feedback from Alamy on this question. My output JPG's generally run between 8 and 15mb in size and if i could limit the bigger files and improve sharpness at the same time then it would definitely speed things up for me.

 

There already is feedback- it's called the submission guidelines. Minimum 6MP, so just over 3000px long side if not cropped. I use 3250 when downsizing, but I have a fast connection so I wouldn't do it just to save uploading time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.