Shrinking RAW image sizes ..

I am curious ... what is a good size to shrink RAW images to?

Right now I have been shrinking them to 1024x768 and they seem a little smooshed together. What would be a better size that is somewhat close to that?

Do you want to shrink them to a dimension, or overally file size as your ultimate goal - are you trying to save hard drive space? I always retain the original dimension as this allows greatest flexibility for print enlargement I feel. If I want to shrink something, I will use one of the numerous JPG sizes.

The only way to "shrink" a raw file is to convert it to a dng. That conversion saves a little on total file size. DNG also permits lossless compression with will further reduce file size for archival storage.

Any "shrinking" in a raw processing program is applying a resize to the output file which is no longer a raw file but rather the file format selected for output, usually JPG or TIFF.

sapearl wrote in post #12569686
Do you want to shrink them to a dimension, or overally file size as your ultimate goal - are you trying to save hard drive space? I always retain the original dimension as this allows greatest flexibility for print enlargement I feel. If I want to shrink something, I will use one of the numerous JPG sizes.

Well I am taking them and posting them up in blogs so I am trying to be user friendly with them and not have massive file sizes with the pictures.

dmward wrote in post #12569965
The only way to "shrink" a raw file is to convert it to a dng. That conversion saves a little on total file size. DNG also permits lossless compression with will further reduce file size for archival storage.

Any "shrinking" in a raw processing program is applying a resize to the output file which is no longer a raw file but rather the file format selected for output, usually JPG or TIFF.

I use photoshop to shrink the image sizes, and yes which in turn changes the output file type to JPG is normally what I use

copenhagen69 wrote in post #12570077
Well I am taking them and posting them up in blogs so I am trying to be user friendly with them and not have massive file sizes with the pictures.


I use photoshop to shrink the image sizes, and yes which in turn changes the output file type to JPG is normally what I use

Ah - makes more sense now . So these are no longer RAW files as had been implied, but much smaller JPG's.

As for what is best, some of it would depend upon blog or site requirements. For example on POTN I believe the largest dimension is 1024 on a side with file size not to exceed 150K. In my wedding proof galleries I set them at 800x600 with file sizes 60-100K or thereabouts. In my personal blog I can make the dimensions anything I want, but I like to keep the files around 100 - 150K. The site automatically resizes the dimensions.

sapearl wrote in post #12570307
Ah - makes more sense now . So these are no longer RAW files as had been implied, but much smaller JPG's.

As for what is best, some of it would depend upon blog or site requirements. For example on POTN I believe the largest dimension is 1024 on a side with file size not to exceed 150K. In my wedding proof galleries I set them at 800x600 with file sizes 60-100K or thereabouts. In my personal blog I can make the dimensions anything I want, but I like to keep the files around 100 - 150K. The site automatically resizes the dimensions.

Yep my blog site I can set the image size to anything, but files size has to be under 300k or so.

I am just trying to find a happy medium for my pictures so they dont look squeezed and "off"

When you say they look "squeezed" what are you referring to? Are you saying that when they get uploaded to your blog site they get distorted?

copenhagen69 wrote in post #12569644
I am curious ... what is a good size to shrink RAW images to?

Right now I have been shrinking them to 1024x768 and they seem a little smooshed together. What would be a better size that is somewhat close to that?

Are you determining each dimension or just one so that you can retain the aspect ratio.

When I reduce the images from my 50D to 1024 on the long side it would be 1024x683. And unless you are cropping your images, yours should be the same. resizing your images to 1024x768 is stretching it by 85 pixels on the short dimension which might make it look smooshed on the long dimension.

When you resize your images make sure you're constraining proportions.
I don't know what you're using to resize. But below are snipettes of how it is done in PS and in Lightroom. In Photoshop make sure you have checked Constrain Proportions, and in Lightroom check and select to size the long edge, and then 1024 pixels.
And on your blog site make sure it is constraining proportion (maintaining aspect ratio) when you place the images into your blog.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

copenhagen69 wrote in post #12569644
I am curious ... what is a good size to shrink RAW images to?

Right now I have been shrinking them to 1024x768 and they seem a little smooshed together. What would be a better size that is somewhat close to that?

Where are you looking for the new dimensions? If you press the I button you should get info that includes the dimensions (you may need to press twice). Also, in the Library module if you scroll down the Metadata panel to the Exif section you should find both the original Raw dimensions and the crop dimensions listed.