sharpening by downsizing

[Phil Robinson 1,167]

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?

[spacecadet 3,922]

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.

[Ed Rooney 3,839]

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