Resizing for Poster Size Prints

[BigRed450]

NEW Tip
I just came upon in the new Scott Kelby book "Photoshop CS2 for digital Photographers", Chapter 4 Rule-Breaking Resizing for Poster Size Prints... His suggestion is to change DPI to 360 and use Bicubic Sharper rather then bicubic smoother for superior results in upsizing, claiming also that it is superior to 3rd party upsizing software or anyother PS method of upsizing..

[JuStDaVe]

can any one confirm this ?

[mdenigris]

Kelby recommends "Bicubic Smoother" and upsizing in 10% increments on pg 75 of "The photoshop CS book". I guess he's contradicting himself in the CS2 book.

[Hellashot]

Or just get Genuine Fractals and don't worry about it :)

[tim]

For big prints you shouldn't resize the image at all, as the RIP that print firms use is far suprior. From the FAQ on this site (http://www.elcocolor.com/hot_internet_only_specials.htm) (caps are theirs).

SHOULD I UPSIZE OR RES UP MY IMAGE? NO! WE KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF STAIR/STEP INTERPOLATION ACTIONS AND SOFTWARE OUT THERE AND THEY MAY WORK GREAT FOR MAKING PRINTS ON YOUR INKJET PRINTER, BUT THEY ARE NOT BETTER THAN OUR RIP. SAVE YOUR TIME AND LET OUR RIP DO THE WORK.

[BigRed450]

Just thought I would pass along some interesting info. A very simple way to get great enlargements with no extra work.

Dave : Yes, I can confirm this, I have compared and it does work better then Bi-Cubic Smoother.

mdenigris : Scott does not neccessarily contradict himself at all. The CS2 book is a newer book for newer software and simply a newer process that has proven to work better. Actually, it was World-Famous Wildlife Photographer Vincent Versace that passed this method onto Scott. Chapter 4 page 108, Rule-Breaking Resizing for Poster Size Prints.
Again, I did some comparison test prints myself today and agree..

Tim : I have spend numerous hours over the last 4-5 years printing and comparing test swatches from all the various Up-sizing programs i.e. Genuine Fractals, S-Spline, Zoom Pro, Up-size Pro, etc. (these by the way are the same programs that the Pro print shops use) and they are simply a waste of money, but of course you don't have to believe me my friends, try for yourself. All these up-sizing programs have 30 day free trials. I have a box full of comparison prints that I can refer back to from time to time. The stair step method does NOT and never did work as well as other methods. The simple but effective up-size wizard in PS7 was far superior to the 10% stairstep upsize trick, but one must actually do the testing oneself to see that difference. I have printed images to the equivalent of 45"x 68" from 10D large fine jpegs with great success and I DO NOT allow printers to re-process my work. I process and resize my own images and they only print. The choice is yours of course if you wish to let them do it.

[BigRed450]

For those interested: Test Update... Test patch equivalent to 24x35"poster

Original Image
http://jtphoto.ca/webimages/1925originalimage.jpg

Bicubic Smoother
http://jtphoto.ca/webimages/smoother.jpg

Bicubic Sharper
http://jtphoto.ca/webimages/sharper.jpg

Combination - oversize then downsize with Bicubic sharper
http://jtphoto.ca/webimages/combsharpersmoother.jpg

In the printed version there is literally no difference between the Bicubic Sharper method and the oversize/reduce combination method, however, there is a slight difference between the smoother and sharper. Bicubic Sharper produces better results in fine detail areas..... Again this is at a poster size of 24x36". No sharpening was added after these clips were resized for web.

[myth337]

hmmm.... looks like another series of test prints lining up...

[Carzee]

Bookmarking this thread....... must be saving others like me So much time benefiting from your experiences. :cool:

[myth337]

Bookmark!! now why didn't I think of that??
(been copying text, making notes, etc...etc..etc..)

[tim]

Example of a RIP: http://www.creativepro.com/story/news/18025.html

[BigRed450]

Example of a RIP: http://www.creativepro.com/story/news/18025.html

Your Choice Tim, just trying to save folks some money.

BTW , I also compared the software S-Spline used here http://www.interpolatethis.com/reallife1.html for a Digital image from a D60 put on the side of a 53' (16m) moving van. PS7 was comparable at that time. Very interesting read for those not familiar with interpolation.

http://www.interpolatethis.com/assets/images/Side27.JPG

myth337: Keep saving these the way you have been. Bookmarks can and do tend to dissappear. I alway copy and paste important worthwhile Tech info into "Word", then catalogue it and then print out a copy for my tech tips binder to go with the photo comparison test prints such as I have done here....

[tim]

That was an example of a program a lab would use, which is why people usually don't need to bother upsizing themselves IMHO.

[BigRed450]

That is exactly my point Tim. A program a Lab would use that produces no better results then PS7 let alone PSCS2. I do understand your point and agree that most people have to get large prints done at a Lab. However, the labs around here charge a processing fee for the up-sizing, so why pay extra for a lab to do the work for you or why pay extra for a program to do it if PS can do the same job.
Personally I still prefer to have control of the up-sizing.
If you can get poster size prints without paying extra for processing thats Great. Talk to your local Lab you may get a better deal if you do the processing yourself.

[tim]

I really don't know much about this subject, i'm just passing on what the lab I use said - ie what I put in my first post in this thread. They say they can do a better job than I can, I tend to believe them.