Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Up-res in Lightroom or Perfect Resize 7 (Geniune Fractals) and other questions?  (Read 10204 times)
tsinsf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 33


« on: January 03, 2012, 11:39:24 PM »
ReplyReply

In the video tutorial Camera to Print and Screen (2011) Jeff Schewe recommends up-resing by 50% if the ppi is less than 300, and to 720 ppi if it is 300 ppi or above. Since I already own Perfect Resize 7, should I use it assuming it would do a better job than Lightroom? I shoot with a Canon 5d Mark 2, so my file dimensions out of camera are 5616x3744; printing 16x24 on my Epson 3880 gives a native resolution of 234ppi.

I have another question. Since the newer Epson printer heads resolution is 360 dpi, why wouldn't it be better to always up-res to at least 360 ppi for images?

Thanks!!
« Last Edit: January 03, 2012, 11:56:27 PM by tsinsf » Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7406


WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 03, 2012, 11:46:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I have looked at a lot of uprezzing packages and have not really seen any real benefits. I would just go with Lightroom at print at 360PPI.

BTW, Eric Chan mentioned that Adobe tested about 30 algorithms before settling on the present one.

Best regards
Erik


In the video tutorial Camera to Print and Screen (2011) Jeff Schewe recommends up-resing by 50% if the ppi is less than 300, and to 720 ppi if it is 300 ppi or above. Since I already own Perfect Resize 7, should I use it assuming it would do a better job than Lightroom? I shoot with a Canon 5d Mark 2, so my file dimensions out of camera are 5616x3744; printing 16x24 on my Epson 3880 gives a native resolution of 234ppi.

I have another question. Since the newer Epson printer heads have 360 spray units/inch, why wouldn't it be better to always up-res to  360 for images below that resolution?

Thanks!!
Logged

feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 04, 2012, 03:02:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Since the newer Epson printer heads resolution is 360 dpi, why wouldn't it be better to always up-res to at least 360 ppi for images?

Or put another way, is the upres algorithm in printers better than the algorithm in LR/Perfect Resize/etc? I don't know the answer, though.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7406


WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 04, 2012, 03:57:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

No that is a different question, and an important one. LR does it's own scaling. That scaling is done before output sharpening. The scaling in LR has nothing to do with scaling in the printer. If you scale in LR to printer native resolution all scaling is done in LR.

Best regards
Erik

Or put another way, is the upres algorithm in printers better than the algorithm in LR/Perfect Resize/etc? I don't know the answer, though.
Logged

Nigel Johnson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 124


« Reply #4 on: January 04, 2012, 07:47:34 AM »
ReplyReply

In the video tutorial Camera to Print and Screen (2011) Jeff Schewe recommends up-resing by 50% if the ppi is less than 300, and to 720 ppi if it is 300 ppi or above.

Jeff has updated this advice, see:

Nope...

It's now any res under 360 goes to 360, any res above 360 goes to 720 and print with finest detail on. In the case of Canon or HP it's 300/600.

Nope...

It's now any res under 360 goes to 360, any res above 360 goes to 720 and print with finest detail on. In the case of Canon or HP it's 300/600.

and specifically with reference to 'finest detail':

No...I said Epson "said that Finest Detail is only useful for vector art"...what I'm saying is that it's also useful when printing out at 720ppi with images whose native resolution is above 360ppi (I can't see any benefit from using Finest Detail when printing at 360).

Regards
Nigel

(Edited to add two additional Jeff Schewe quotes.)
« Last Edit: January 04, 2012, 08:13:10 AM by Nigel Johnson » Logged
tsinsf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 33


« Reply #5 on: January 04, 2012, 09:40:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Would you mind sharing where these quotes are from? I'd love to read or listen to the whole discussion. Thanks.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9093



WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 04, 2012, 09:56:08 AM »
ReplyReply

I have looked at a lot of uprezzing packages and have not really seen any real benefits. I would just go with Lightroom at print at 360PPI.

Ditto. Did a Webinar a few months back on the subject, found that with proper capture sharpening (that is KEY), LR did a better job than any of the 3rd party products I tested. Faster too. Just slightly better than Photoshop with the same capture sharpening. From those I respect who have also tested the waters, some of these 3rd party products are a bit better when you have to upsize a tiny original (the example was a 640x480 xray).
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Ramonn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 14


« Reply #7 on: January 04, 2012, 11:33:56 AM »
ReplyReply

How do you manage to print 16 x 24 on the 3880?  The maximum sheet size is 17 x 22 and there is no provision for rolls of paper.
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5474


WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 04, 2012, 11:46:47 AM »
ReplyReply

The maximum sheet size is 17 x 22 and there is no provision for rolls of paper.

No, the max size is 17 x 37. You have to make a custom paper size to do it though...
Logged
howardm
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #9 on: January 04, 2012, 11:47:32 AM »
ReplyReply

you can print up to 17x37.5 on a 38xx if you can get the paper (RedRiver).

Logged
AFairley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1158



« Reply #10 on: January 04, 2012, 12:08:01 PM »
ReplyReply

I print 17x22 on an Epson 3800. Native files from my Olympus E-5 are around 180 ppi at that output size.  My workflow is to uprez to 360 ppi for printing using Genuine Fractals 6 and then apply output sharpening to the uprezzed file using smart sharpening.  There is a slight difference in the final print using that workflow compared to printing straight from LR3, but is it slight.  GF6 looks more painterly to my eye.  But really, I think it is more a matter of taste than of raw quality.  Everyone else's MMV, of course.
Logged

Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2843


« Reply #11 on: January 04, 2012, 02:59:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Would you mind sharing where these quotes are from? I'd love to read or listen to the whole discussion. Thanks.

What may have changed his opinion is probably found in discussions in this forum. October 2011 has one and there have been more.

met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
Logged
migreen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #12 on: January 04, 2012, 03:08:36 PM »
ReplyReply

You can check this thread for Jeff's newer opinion . .   there's an earlier one as well.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=58368.0

Mitch
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2840



WWW
« Reply #13 on: January 04, 2012, 05:34:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Since the newer Epson printer heads resolution is 360 dpi, why wouldn't it be better to always up-res to at least 360 ppi for images?

the "head" resolution is just how many dots of ink it can spit out at a time.  a "head" resolution of 180/inch  nozzles can print identically to one of 360/inch, it just means the print head must make 2 passes across to put the same number of dots on the paper as the other printhead does in one pass.  the main advantage of the higher density nozzles is speed. (btw, the 3880 is 180 nozzles, not 360)

The printer driver does work internally at a "resolution" which for Epson is 360/720.  I also recommend you let Lightroom handle it, it's amazingly good and fast.  The discussions mentioned talk about when to use 360 in Lightroom and when to use 720, I pretty much use that workflow now and print only from Lightroom.  Many of my files make the round trip to PS for creative sharpening, but now I can have one master file to print to any size I want and LR does a great job of handling output sharpening.
Logged

Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5474


WWW
« Reply #14 on: January 04, 2012, 05:42:26 PM »
ReplyReply

What may have changed his opinion is probably found in discussions in this forum. October 2011 has one and there have been more.

No actually, it was earlier...when Mike and I shot the first series of the C2PS vids in April, I was still thinking upsample at least 50% if under 360PPI and keep native rez if over 360...that came about when Lightroom 3 was released. With further testing I changed my mind and thought if under 360 upsample to 360 and if over 360, upsample to 720. That was further refined by adding the addition of using Finest Detail option in the Epson driver. The second round of shooting we did in May covered upsampling to 720 for images whose native rez was above 360 but below 720.

My current thinking is in the current/recent issue of Digital Photo Pro magazine article "The Right Resolution".
« Last Edit: January 04, 2012, 05:47:09 PM by Schewe » Logged
tsinsf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 33


« Reply #15 on: January 04, 2012, 08:51:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you so much!!
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7406


WWW
« Reply #16 on: January 05, 2012, 01:06:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Jeff,

Thanks for pointing to the article!

Best regards
Erik


No actually, it was earlier...when Mike and I shot the first series of the C2PS vids in April, I was still thinking upsample at least 50% if under 360PPI and keep native rez if over 360...that came about when Lightroom 3 was released. With further testing I changed my mind and thought if under 360 upsample to 360 and if over 360, upsample to 720. That was further refined by adding the addition of using Finest Detail option in the Epson driver. The second round of shooting we did in May covered upsampling to 720 for images whose native rez was above 360 but below 720.

My current thinking is in the current/recent issue of Digital Photo Pro magazine article "The Right Resolution".
Logged

feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #17 on: January 05, 2012, 02:25:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

No that is a different question, and an important one. LR does it's own scaling. That scaling is done before output sharpening. The scaling in LR has nothing to do with scaling in the printer. If you scale in LR to printer native resolution all scaling is done in LR.

duh. My point was whether it's better to send a image already scaled to printer native resolution in LR to the printer, or let the printer do the scaling.

Moot point now, since Schewe answers that question further up this thread (resize before sending to printer).
Logged

sbrewell
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #18 on: January 05, 2012, 03:40:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Just read the excellent article "The Right Resolution" by Jeff Schewe in DigitalPhotoPro. But it has left me with a question:
 
I have a (new) Epson R3000, so I want to print my images at 360ppi.
 
0. Using Photoshop CS5, I can use Image Resize to set the resolution to 360ppi and natively, with no resampling, this makes the 12.3mp image, say 6inx4in. I guess if I print this (either in PS after applying some output sharpening, or in LR using output sharpening), this is the best print I can achieve.
 
However, If I wanted to print an enlarged version, I have 4 options, but which will give me the best printed image quality?
 
1. In PS, resize the image but maintain resolution at 360ppi using Resampling. I can then just sharpen/print from PS as the image is at 360ppi
 
2. In PS, resize the image but don't constrain the resolution, i.e. let it reduce to whatever it takes for that size - no resampling. Then print it in LR, by setting the output resolution to 360ppi and let LR do the resampling and the sharpening (LR is uprezzing the image)
 
3. Open the original from step 0 above in LR - it is already at 360ppi - then resize/zoom to fit paper in LR without changing the resolution (LR is increasing the image size at the same ppi)
 
4. Use Perfect Resize 7 plugin to do the resizing
 
I would very much appreciate your views on why which approach is best
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5474


WWW
« Reply #19 on: January 05, 2012, 04:01:50 PM »
ReplyReply

A upsample (while keeping the rez to 360) is what you would want to do...then sharpen. Upsampling to 200% is very doable...past that you hit the limits of image quality.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad