Resize for photos or not

[Steve Ruddy]

Is there any benefit to resizing an image to the print size before printing? If I let my printing software do it will the results be identicle?

[Lowner]

Steve,

I have never seen an advantage. I tend to leave the image file at it's "natural" ppi and let Epsons driver decide what to do because although I enjoy post processing, I'm basically lazy & don't like unnecessary work.

With my 30D files & Eos-3 film scans, this often gives me an A4 sized print at 360ppi. I assume that the driver uses 300ppi (dpi/ppi? You know what I mean) as the printers "natural" setting.

Richard

[René Damkot]

I do resize to the print size and run the TLR script for output sharpening afterwards.

That way I know what the sharpening will do, without introducing more unknown variables ;)

[BillMarks]

I do resize to the print size and run the TLR script for output sharpening afterwards.

That way I know what the sharpening will do, without introducing more unknown variables ;)

Yep--that's what I do and why I do it.

[Steve Ruddy]

I do resize to the print size and run the TLR script for output sharpening afterwards

Sounds like what I would like to try. What is the TLR script? Also when trying to look at say a 4x6 at print size in CS3 the quality is not good edges are jaggy. How can one look at the image before printing to see how sharp it will be. Looking at a 4x6 at 100% with my monitor resolution makes it way to big.

[René Damkot]

TLR sharpening toolkit (http://www.thelightsright.com/TLRProfessionalSharpeningToolkit.htm).

Sharpening will look different on screen vs. print.
Simply put; ink has a tendency to 'spread out" a bit. An image properly sharpened for print will look oversharpened on screen. Also, an image on screen is way bigger then the same image printed.

Keep in mind that, when you send images out to be printed, the print company will likely apply their own sharpening!

Sharpness can be judged in PS at 100%, as long as you keep in mind that the print will look different. For that reason, some people prefer to judge sharpening on 50% or 25%. Magnifications like 33% or 66% will look "off" because of the resizing algorithm used for screen by Photoshop.

Nice thread about sharpeninhttp://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=466333.

[tzalman]

Steve,

I have never seen an advantage. I tend to leave the image file at it's "natural" ppi and let Epsons driver decide what to do because although I enjoy post processing, I'm basically lazy & don't like unnecessary work.

With my 30D files & Eos-3 film scans, this often gives me an A4 sized print at 360ppi. I assume that the driver uses 300ppi (dpi/ppi? You know what I mean) as the printers "natural" setting.

Richard
Actually 300 dpi is for Canon and HP printers. Epsons are at 360 dpi.

[Lowner]

Elie,

Thanks, thats very valuable information. Epson don't actually tell me in any of the manuals/instructions I've ever received.

Richard

[grounded]

TLR sharpening toolkit (http://www.thelightsright.com/TLRProfessionalSharpeningToolkit.htm)...~~snipped~ ~

Great scripts!

Thanks for the link. :)

[agedbriar]

According to the author of Qimage, the printing program, the native (working) driver resolution within Canon and HP printer drivers is 600 ppi, resp. 720 ppi with Epson. The dpi the printer prints at may be multiples of those ppi values when more than one ink dot per image pixel is being layed down.

Those are the ppi values Qimage automatically resizes the image to before printing (with very good output results).

According to the same source, any resize to ppi values other than 600/720 calls for a further resize performed by the printer driver to obtain those values - a superfluous operation that degrades the final print quality.

http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/quality/

[tim]

My pro lab requires me to resize and set the ppi correctly, it fits in with their automated systems. I suspect a decent upload system would do this for you, but they use basically plain old ftp.