Loosing sharpness when reducing

[HrcRacing]

Hello,
I was just wondering if it's possible to reduce images without loosing sharpness? All the shots I've posted here have lost considerable amounts of sharpness as compared to the full-size image when I reduced on HP Image Zone and now PSE 2.0.
Can anything be done to correct this?
Thank you,
Robert

[jimsolt]

Hello,
I was just wondering if it's possible to reduce images without loosing sharpness? All the shots I've posted here have lost considerable amounts of sharpness as compared to the full-size image when I reduced on HP Image Zone and now PSE 2.0.
Can anything be done to correct this?
Thank you,
Robert

Try sharpening the image after you have sized it for posting and just before you post it.

Jim

[soupdragon]

I know this is of no help what so ever but I ahve the same problem.
Whenever I resize pictures for the web they alway appear lacklustre compared to the original.
Most annoying.

[jimsolt]

I know this is of no help what so ever but I ahve the same problem.
Whenever I resize pictures for the web they alway appear lacklustre compared to the original.
Most annoying.
Lackluster is different than sharpness. Lackluster could be wrong color space, Adobe RGB for instance.

In both instances, perhaps examples would help.

[GSHodg]

I suggest you always sharpen AFTER reducing the image to it's target size. This goes for printing as well as web display. Also when you sharpen, view the file at multipleof 25% (25, 50, 75, 100%) to help judge the sharpening. For image sizes of 550pixels on long side (that's the maximum I put on the web), try using USM settings of Amount = 150, Radius, 0.5, Threshold of 2 as a starting point - optimal settings will vary per image, but start there and you may be close.

Use sRGB colour space for images displayed on the web.



Hello,
I was just wondering if it's possible to reduce images without loosing sharpness? All the shots I've posted here have lost considerable amounts of sharpness as compared to the full-size image when I reduced on HP Image Zone and now PSE 2.0.
Can anything be done to correct this?
Thank you,
Robert

[ladybelle2k]

Just a thought if you're using photoshop, when you re-size uncheck the "resample" box and get as close to the size you want. If you need to do minor resizing after that then go back into re-size and re-check the resample box for the minor adjustment. This might help.

[soupdragon]

Lackluster is different than sharpness. Lackluster could be wrong color space, Adobe RGB for instance.

In both instances, perhaps examples would help.

Well, if you look in the macro forum for a thread entitled "poser" you will see a dragonfly picture I posted.
Before resize it was much more vivid, sharper and appeared to come off the screen at me.
Though you have no comparative standard to work from, to me the image appears flat.
I used the term lacklustre as a generic for generally mediocre.
If you can do anything with it, feel free.

[Scottes]

Sharpening should be done for the output size, so it's generally the last thing to be done. (Nt always, but that's a huge discussion.) Get it to the size you wish, then go to Filters... Sharpen... Unsharp Mask. For a web image start with Threshold 0, Radius between 0.4 and 0.7, and then play with the Amount until it looks right. Toggle the Preview several times so you can really get an idea of how much it's sharpened. Then Convert To Profile... sRGB, and Save For Web and uncheck the ICC box, check Optimize, and play with the Quality until it looks good. I generally don't like to go below 53 because that when some extreme things happen, but sometimes you'll need to go lower to get the file size down.

[jimsolt]

Well, if you look in the macro forum for a thread entitled "poser" you will see a dragonfly picture I posted.
Before resize it was much more vivid, sharper and appeared to come off the screen at me.
Though you have no comparative standard to work from, to me the image appears flat.
I used the term lacklustre as a generic for generally mediocre.
If you can do anything with it, feel free.
Sorry if I misinterpret lacklustre or now mediocre. I have not gone seeking examples in another thread, nor do I plan to. I was only suggesting something you might try. At the risk of misinterpreting "flat", I still suggest you might be talking about more than one problem, and it basically boils down to the photo not properly prepared to publish at the allowable size on the web.
I look at it as your choice what to do, not mine. I only offer suggestions based on your question(s).

Jim

[Robert_Lay]

Just a thought if you're using photoshop, when you re-size uncheck the "resample" box and get as close to the size you want. If you need to do minor resizing after that then go back into re-size and re-check the resample box for the minor adjustment. This might help.

I would like to understand your rationale' for that first step. Assuming that you are using Image-> Image Size, then with the reampling disabled, there is no way that you are changing the size of the image as will be displayed on the monitor or on the Web. That is because, as you can see in the Image->Image Size dialogue window, the pixel dimensions do not change when you have resampling disabled.

The second step that you describe as a minor re-sizing is the only step where you are able to actually affect the number of pixels in the image. So, I would ask you to explain exactly what you intend to do in that step.

[ladybelle2k]

Bob,

My error, I was thinking in terms of printing...just re-read the original post and you are right it was for web viewing...disregard my post...lol

[HrcRacing]

Just for the record, what I'm referring to has nothing to do with color. With my images, if I zoom on the original, it looks nice and sharp. When viewing the reduced image, it appears to my eye to be a bit soft/out of focus. This is magnified by zooming in of course.
I'll try what's been suggested and see how I get on with that.
Thank you all for your input! :smile:

Okay, when you say USM at 150, are you referring to the % section of Unsharp Mask window? Also, Scottes, you state to "Then Convert To Profile... sRGB". I'm shooting JPEG in sRGB profile, do I still need to do this or is this something pertaining to RAW?
Thank you,
Robert

[Bodog]

Anytime you re-sample and image (up or down) you will lose some detail and must again sharpen based on the new size.

[soupdragon]

Sorry if I misinterpret lacklustre or now mediocre. I have not gone seeking examples in another thread, nor do I plan to. I was only suggesting something you might try. At the risk of misinterpreting "flat", I still suggest you might be talking about more than one problem, and it basically boils down to the photo not properly prepared to publish at the allowable size on the web.
I look at it as your choice what to do, not mine. I only offer suggestions based on your question(s).

Jim

Sorry you interpreted my reply slightly out of context (I should have used smileys) .
It was more of a cry for help when I asked you to look at my posted picture.

No offence meant.

[Robert_Lay]

Bob,

My error, I was thinking in terms of printing...just re-read the original post and you are right it was for web viewing...disregard my post...lol

No problem! Just making a morning sanity check - :p

[GSHodg]

Okay, when you say USM at 150, are you referring to the % section of Unsharp Mask window?

try reading carefully before posting. I did specify what setting I meant as 150...

"try using USM settings of Amount = 150, Radius, 0.5, Threshold of 2 as a starting point - optimal settings will vary per image, but start there and you may be close."

[jimsolt]

Sorry you interpreted my reply slightly out of context (I should have used smileys) .
It was more of a cry for help when I asked you to look at my posted picture.

No offence meant.
Offense wasn't percieved. I suggested when an image doesn't look right, it is very helpful to post it in the same forum you are talking about it. You will get more helpful answers that way.

I still suggest you get more familiar with the processes involved with posting an image on the web. I think when you do, you will find your problems will diminish considerably. There are really only 2 issues that would make your posting appear differently than what you have edited. One is the sharpening. Depending on the usage, differing amounts of sharpening are desirable. What might look very nice in one form, might be over or undersharpened in another. That's why people are suggesting sharpening as the last step -- and yes, it's a good idea to leave that discussion at this stage for this discussion.
The other is the color space. It's perfectly acceptable to use Adobe RGB to edit, but to look good on the web, most agree sRGB is a better choice. The RGB colors tend to be less vibrant and more washed out making the image "lacklustre."
Jim

[Scottes]

Also, Scottes, you state to "Then Convert To Profile... sRGB". I'm shooting JPEG in sRGB profile, do I still need to do this or is this something pertaining to RAW?
If you shoot JPG sRGB you can skip this conversion step. The talk about a "flat image" made me think of a color profile mis-match, and the failure to convert to sRGB is often the culprit. But your pics are always in sRGB so you do not need to convert.

[HrcRacing]

Thanks Scottes, I appreciate that. This thread has been very helpful and I'm amazed by how well the Unsharp Mask works on reduced images.
Thanks again all for your input.
Robert