Resizing images

[SGerke]

I was trying to upload my first pictures, but realized they are WAY too big. How to I resize them without cropping? I use PSE8.

Thanks,

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Sarah,

Fairly easy in PSE (I use 6)
This should be done before the final (or Output) sharpening process, see below.
You may want to save as psd, tif or even jpg before doing this, so you can go back to a processed full size image.

From menu bar;
1) Image > Resize > Image Size... (or keyboard Alt+Ctrl+I)

Near the bottom of dialog
2) Ensure all the checkboxes are ticked; Scale Styles, Constrain Proportions and Resample Image

In the top pair of boxes, with the measurement unit set to pixels (not percent)
3) Type in a new Width; say 1000
Height will set itself automatically if Constrain Proportions is ticked

Ignore the Document Size grouped options (it's just different way of doing the same as step 3)

In the dropbox beside Resample Image;
4) If down sizing, you may want to change from the default "Bicubic" to "Bicubic Sharper"

5) Click OK button

If it was a significant downsize (halving or more) then you may need to
6) Apply a new sharpening (I use USM), the figures to use depend on the image content.
Something in the order of: 35-60%, 0.6-0.9px and threshold of 1 (or 2-8 if image is noisy/grainy)

Step 6 is optional, especially if you did use Bicubic Sharper in step 4.
Personally, when down-sizing, I prefer simple "Bicubic", but I always re-sharpen myself, as I find the sharpening applied automatically can be too much for some subjects.

7) Save As jpg, I normally use the filename but add a suffix with the width,
e.g. DSC0123_W1000.jpg, so I can find the web images quickly for uploading

Cheers,

[Hans]

This should be done before the final (or Output) sharpening process, see below

Sorry Sarah and Dave, don't mean to butt in but I think this has answered a question for me and would love to confirm... if Sarah doesn't mind.

So, my downsized photos look fuzzy because they have been downsized so I should load up my downsized jpg and sharpen it again (even though I have already sharpened it as a RAW file in my RAW PP (I'm using NX2)) before loading it onto a website.... ?

thanks for your time guys,

Hans

[Colin Southern]

So, my downsized photos look fuzzy because they have been downsized so I should load up my downsized jpg and sharpen it again (even though I have already sharpened it as a RAW file in my RAW PP (I'm using NX2)) before loading it onto a website.... ?

Hi Hans,

I wrote a little on sharpening some time ago - thought you might find it helpful.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Hans,

Firstkly, don't worry; I wouldn't consider anyone adding to a discussion here as butting in
Your views or questions are as valid as everyone else's.

so I should load up my downsized jpg and sharpen it again (even though I have already sharpened it as a RAW file in my RAW PP (I'm using NX2)) before loading it onto a website.... ?

Short answer; Yes
Long answer; read the thread Colin has linked above, and having skimmed through it all again now, and got to the bottom, yes I did buy the book and it helped me refine my RAW workflow techniques even further.

Medium/additional answer; Be very wary of uploading a picture at one (big) size and using the hosting web sites 'free' alternative sizes of picture in critical inline posts because they won't be sharpened after that downsize and the jpg quality they use is low - they do this to limit bandwidth demand on their servers.
Always downsize and sharpen in one image editor pass (i.e. don't close and re-open the jpg in between).
Always downsize to the size you want to post inline here; good values being 680 width to get it max size without expansion, or 1000 or 1200 if you need to show more detail. Then use the direct link from a hosting sites 'original' (size) link.
If posting itno albums here, down size to max 600 width.
Use bicubic, or possibly bicubic sharper - I use the former, then manually sharpen.

Cheers,

[Hans]

Thanks a lot guys.

Have been up all night combing through the internet and it is quite a fussy business, this sharpening thing, if you want it to be. I'm still coming to terms with layers so just use the unsharp mask at the moment.

Colin and Dave, thanks for your time and thoughtful responses. I'm going straight for that link now....


Hans

[Colin Southern]

No worries Hans,

If it's something that you'd really like to understand more then there's no substitute for Real World Image Sharpening, 2nd Edition by Fraser & Schewe. It can be heavy reading in a lot of places though.

[Hans]

...Ok I've read it. I also read some excerpts from the book. Whooshka!...straight over my head, but it did shed some light. Might have to order that one and those aspirin!

Some quick questions if that's ok...

I usually (I've been RAW PP in Capture NX2 for about a week!) open the RAW file (not sure if it is sharpened by NX2 or not) and do all my adjustments if required (levels, curves[though a bit scary at the moment], exposure comp etc) and then do USM and 'Save As' jpg image.

Q1: Does this damage my RAW file at all, i.e. should I work only on a copy as I've noticed some people do?

Q2: Also, I've only been using an intensity of about 10-15% with a radius of 1 and threshold of 0 coz that's what I read in a mgazine, but I think they must have been talking about jpgs. That would make sense wouldn't it? Unfortunately I've just ordered my first batch of 4X6 prints from a photo lab and that's the only sharpening I've done, so maybe they will be very soft. Never mind.

Q3: NX2's USM only allows an intensity of 100%. Does anyone know if this is equivalent to 100% in CS2 or would it be equivalent to Photo Shop's highest setting (seems strange since most people seem to be using over 100%)?

Thanks again. The reason I am like a dog with a bone is that my sister-in-law asked me to take the photos for her wedding. I said no. She said she couldn't afford a pro. I said no. She said she would put some instant 35mm cameras on tables. I reluctantly agreed. Now I have 350 photos to process and send to her for printing and I shot in RAW with a D90 which I only got the week before the wedding...stupid stupid stupid! Should have loaded some slide film in the F80 and shot with what I know or just used jpg format. Water under the bridge...anyway, that's my dirty little secret

Hans

[Colin Southern]

...Ok I've read it. I also read some excerpts from the book. Whooshka!...straight over my head, but it did shed some light. Might have to order that one and those aspirin!

Yeah -- to be honest, it's probably one of those books where you'll get through a chapter and then let it "marinate" for a few weeks while you put it into practice and consolidate the info.

Q1: Does this damage my RAW file at all, i.e. should I work only on a copy as I've noticed some people do?

No. The actual RAW data is never changed (because conversion is essentially a one-way process), but the likes of Adobe's ACR (Adobe Camera RAW) will write change information to the metadata so that changes made are still there next time you open the RAW file, but it is all completely reversable. With ACR the change data is written directly to the file if the file is in DNG format, or to an XMP side-car file if it's in it's native RAW format like CR2 or NEF.

Q2: Also, I've only been using an intensity of about 10-15% with a radius of 1 and threshold of 0 coz that's what I read in a mgazine, but I think they must have been talking about jpgs. That would make sense wouldn't it? Unfortunately I've just ordered my first batch of 4X6 prints from a photo lab and that's the only sharpening I've done, so maybe they will be very soft.

Depends on which sharpening phase you're talking about I always do capture sharpening at 300%, 0.3 pixels on a full resolution image - but that just so it makes it nicer to work on ... you won't see that in a finished print unless you're printing VERY large, and looking VERY close.

If you're talking content/creative sharpening then it varies - again, on a full resolution image, 40%/0.4 are quite common, but it varies quite a lot. Because I'm mostly printing large canvases I've got into the bad habit of essentially doing this in conjuction with output sharpening.

If you down-sample an image for online display then you need to re-sharpen - often capture sharpening settings work well (just co-incidence) - sorry, can't say what these would be in Nikon Software.

my sister-in-law asked me to take the photos for her wedding. I said no.

Good move!

She said she couldn't afford a pro. I said no.

Good move!

She said she would put some instant 35mm cameras on tables. I reluctantly agreed.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Seriously, no disrespect intended (I give the same advice to everyone) - just in general it means you get all the stress - you miss all the fun - AND - they still expect you to produce professional results (because as everyone knows, "all you have to do it point the camera and hit the button' (given that all modern cameras do all the thinking for you these days!)

[Hans]

Yep, yep and Double yep!

Thanks Colin.

I'm going to do a search on what the difference is between capture and creative sharpening.

I've had a play around it appears that oversharpening the file before resizing it helps with the apparent sharpness in the web or email photo. I did it that way because when I open a resized (websized) photo and try to resharpen it the unsharp mask has no effect at all.

All good fun anyway...oh for 6mths holidays to devote some time to the digital capture dimension of the universe.

Kind regards,

Hans

[Colin Southern]

Hi Hans,

Capture sharpening compensates for softness introduced during digitization, demosaicing, and anti-aliasing ... it just makes the image nicer to work on at high magnifications.

Content/creative sharpening is what gives the image overall "pop".

Don't over-sharpen prior to down-sampling; down-sample and then resharpen. The numbers change dramatically depending on the resolution though.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Hans,

Firstly, although you got to where you are now with all the right intentions, and you've created a pile of work in PP from RAW, if you hadn't shot RAW, any exposure or WB inaccuracies would be far more serious.

I can easily imagine myself arriving in a similar situation in those circumstances

Sadly for you, I don't use NX2, despite being Nikon man, so I can't help with those settings either, sorry.

I just use the (cut down) ACR available from Elements , mainly because I had it and was using it to process RAW before I got the Nikon and as I was comfortable, why change
Help from CiC (Colin mainly) and his book recommendation for ACR were fundamental to my achieving a sensible RAW workflow and half way decent sharpening results (most of the time).

If you have Elements (or Photoshop CSx) as well, I/we can help a lot more.

Cheers,

[RonH]

Great info here ... many thanks. I am very new to PSE8 and it shows in my downloaded pics! Have to do some studying to do a more professional job.

[Hans]

Capture sharpening compensates for softness introduced during digitization, demosaicing, and anti-aliasing ... it just makes the image nicer to work on at high magnifications.

Colin, you have been so kind with your time. I am really sorry to ask this pathtically stupid question...but do you do the Capture Sharpening yourself in USM, then do your other things to the photo, then undo the Capture Sharpening before you do the Creative Sharpening?

Content/creative sharpening is what gives the image overall "pop".

So is this the 'final sharpening' or second pass that people talk about, and is can it be done with USM or usually with layers?

Thanks again Colin, really appreciate your condescension (literal not colloquial meaning) to this mere mortal!

I just use the (cut down) ACR available from Elements

So Dave, Elements 8 contains the ability to process RAW through ACR (cut down version)? I thought only the full version of PS worked with RAW (just another example of my ignorance). This I will investigate, as it is real pain working with something that no one can help with NX2 keeps crashing too and often just before I save the image (probably because I only have 2GB RAM) Having said that, maybe it is the devil I know over something new. I am finding that I can generally convert techniques from photoshop tutorials into Gimp2 (which doesn't do RAW without a 'plug in' whatever that is).

Great info here ... many thanks. I am very new to PSE8 and it shows in my downloaded pics! Have to do some studying to do a more professional job

LOL, glad I could be of assistance RonH! I'll check out your photos in a minute...

Thanks and kind regards guys,

Hans

[Colin Southern]

Colin, you have been so kind with your time.

No worries Hans - it's what we're here for

Do you do the Capture Sharpening yourself in USM, then do your other things to the photo, then undo the Capture Sharpening before you do the Creative Sharpening?

For capture sharpening I use a USM of 300% @ 0.3 pixels @ 0 threshold for ISO 100 or 200 images - saved as an action so that it's only 1 click away. Once it's applied however, it's not reversed. It's a different type of sharpening to the second and third passes though - best way to appreciate it is to zoom an image to 100% - bring up a USM - plug in 300% @ 0.3pixels - and then look at what happens to the image detail as you toggle image preview off and on several times.

So is this the 'final sharpening' or second pass that people talk about, and is can it be done with USM or usually with layers?

There are many different approaches - personally, I normally just use a USM. It is possible to get technically/slightly better results using smart sharpening, but personally I've concluded that the extra effort isn't warranted given the small return (keeping in mind that I mostly print onto canvas which further nulls the differences between the two). There are techniques that apply sharpening via layers, but I don't bother; if in doubt, I'll just duplicate the base layer and tuck it away as a "backup".

The flipside of sharpening is that it also accentuates noise - so if you have noisy shadows then you may want to mask those areas off prior to sharpening, but personally I just make sure I have my exposure correct and it's just not an issue.

So Dave, Elements 8 contains the ability to process RAW through ACR (cut down version)? I thought only the full version of PS worked with RAW (just another example of my ignorance).

I'll try to do a good "Dave" impression for a minute ...

ACR has 9 "tabs" under PS, but (off memory) only the first 2 under PSE. Having said that, I seldom go past the first tab anyway - and - what's on the other 7 tabs can probably be duplicated to a large degree in PSE anyway.

I've tried NX2 (briefly) - didn't like it to be honest. Some swear by it, but I suspect that there's also a few who just have some kind of bone to pick with Adobe (and often Microsoft and/or Canon) - at the end of the day Adobe have the lions share of the market - capable products - and (via books, videos, forums etc), a formidable amound of help and support - which captures more of the market. Sure - the software isn't cheap - but - neither is anything else to do with photography - and - the cost of the software isn't usually a big percentage of the overall cost of everything.

[Hans]

LOL!

AHA! I think I have got it. You basically sharpen the whole image at the measurements you've given me, then, later (after doeing whatever else) you might adjust the sharpness of various parts of the image as required to your personal taste or creative intent/output mode!?

Is that the fog lifting or the gaping chasm I'm about to step into?

I've sent off a series of photos to the photo lab with various degrees of sharpening to see what standard I might start working from.

You guys are fabulous help.

Appreciated

Hans

[Colin Southern]

LOL!

AHA! I think I have got it. You basically sharpen the whole image at the measurements you've given me, then, later (after doeing whatever else) you might adjust the sharpness of various parts of the image as required to your personal taste or creative intent/output mode!?

You're onto it

Sharpening is all about increasing contrast around edges - so the effectiveness of certain amount/pixel combinations also depends on the resolution of the image. Case in point ... 300% @ 0.3 pixels is my standard for capture sharpening - however - if you took all of the images displayed here (keeping in mind that most have one dimension somewhere between 800 & 1000 pixels) - applied the same 300% @ 0.3 etc it would (in more cases than not) actually improve the image, because in this situation 300% @ 0.3 often works well for output sharpening, after an image has been down-sampled.

So - for a quick and dirty workflow - you might have something like this ...

- original image = 4500 x 3000 pixels

- Apply capture sharpening: 300% @ 0.3 pixels

- Apply creative/content sharpening: 40% @ 4 pixels

- Down-sample to 900 x 600 pixels

- Apply output sharpening: 300% @ 0.3 pixels

Needs to be tweaked depending on the image, but you get the idea

[Donald]

Apply output sharpening: 300% @ 0.3 pixels

Hope you don't mind me coming into this discussion gents.

I have just learned that I've been behaving far too gently/conservatively with the output sharpening. I've been closer to the figures of the content sharpen than the capture sharpen. No wonder I've been getting frustrated at what I'm loading up and how did I get this so wrong after studying previous threads on the subject!!??

[Colin Southern]

Hope you don't mind me coming into this discussion gents.

I have just learned that I've been behaving far too gently/conservatively with the output sharpening. I've been closer to the figures of the content sharpen than the capture sharpen. No wonder I've been getting frustrated at what I'm loading up and how did I get this so wrong after studying previous threads on the subject!!??

Hi Donald,

I hope I haven't created a monster here

Take the output sharpening figures I gave with a grain-of-salt - but in many cases it's something that will improve a LOT of images I see.

As a rule of thumb, the fewer the number of pixels the higher the sharpening amount you'll need - but the smaller the radius. I don't often go over 300% (unless I'm also trying to compensate for a small focusing issue), but it may also be only 150% or 100% or occasionally even less.

For radius, it can vary - usually 0.2 won't produce anything visually, but apply it twice and it can make a subtle improvement over 0.3 - occasionally it needs to be higher - all depends on the image.

The good news is though - it's easy to get it just right - just look at the final image at 100%, and play with it until you like what you see. I'd suggest previewing 150% @ 0.3 and then vary amount up to 300% and radius up a bit higher in various combinations until a little light comes on

[Donald]

I hope I haven't created a monster here

Absolutely not. I, along with Hans (and the many others who'll be looking at this), will appreciate that what we're getting here is the sort of quality tutorial that lots of people would give an arm and a leg for.

Take the output sharpening figures I gave with a grain-of-salt

Point taken. And agreed. But what we've been provided with here is a baseline - a starting point. Of course, we all have to work with each image we have and recognise that we must to do the work to produce the final product. It doesn't get handed to us on a plate and there can be no magic formula for every image.

But, it's this sort of exchange that, I'm sure, lies behind an awful lot of people who join this site talking about the quality of the help and support.

A member for almost a year (11 weeks of which as a non-smoker - just to remind you ... and boast) and I'm enjoying it more than ever.