Phil Robinson Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 I think (have always assumed) the point of downsizing is not to actually make the image sharper - most customers will print it much smaller and there will be no difference - but to make it appear sharper to someone viewing the image at 100%. In other words is to get it through QC rather than to actually improve the image. Or am I just being cynical? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 1 hour ago, Phil Robinson said: I think (have always assumed) the point of downsizing is not to actually make the image sharper - most customers will print it much smaller and there will be no difference - but to make it appear sharper to someone viewing the image at 100%. In other words is to get it through QC rather than to actually improve the image. Or am I just being cynical? No, that's quite right. It's to pass QC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 Yes, I'm caught up in the downsizing thing too, although I don't do it to "save" a questionable-sharpness image. They get dumped. So why then? Habit. It's now part of my step-by-step workflow. And of course I crop if a crop is called for. I shot for, aim for, common access editorial images, so a large file is not terribly important. Edo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.