Least destructive way......

of resampling down?

Here's my situation, I took for the first time, a really nice shot baseball shot. The mom of the pitcher would like a print. I want to print this at 8 x 10, without any cropping (i.e. I want the whole photo in 8 x 10).

So my only option, if I don't want to crop, is to resample down to 8 x 10. I was taught always that resampling down is a no-no. My plan is to print this at Costco's.

I have CS2. Which of the resample methods is the least destructive, so I can fit this whole image in 8 x 10? Is resampling down going to be that harmful to the qualty of the image?

I'm attaching the image so you understand what I'm after.

Why would you want to resample the whole image to a different aspect ratio (that's what I understood you to mean) since the features would be distorted. Surely best to crop to a 8:10 aspect then resample to 300 dpi if necessary.. By the way I use bicubic sharper resampling to good effect.

EOSAddict wrote in post #3636317
Why would you want to resample the whole image to a different aspect ratio (that's what I understood you to mean) since the features would be distorted. Surely best to crop to a 8:10 aspect then resample to 300 dpi if necessary.. By the way I use bicubic sharper resampling to good effect.

Because I cannot resize to exactly 8 x 10 (constrain proportions) - the only way is to resample down to 8 x 10.

Then it's going to look very odd

In the "resize" dialog box, un-check constrain proportions, make sure that you are in "inches" and not pixels, enter 10 in the height and 8 in the width and 300 in the dpi.

By un-checking "constrain proportions" you can get the entire image in an 8 x 10.

Rad

Radtech1 wrote in post #3636420
In the "resize" dialog box, un-check constrain proportions, make sure that you are in "inches" and not pixels, enter 10 in the height and 8 in the width and 300 in the dpi.

By un-checking "constrain proportions" you can get the entire image in an 8 x 10.

Rad

Hey thanks! I simply forgot I could uncheck constrain proportions. That makes a big difference, so I don't have to resample down.

Pat

But, surely, unless you crop to 8:10 aspect, any unconstrained resize of the existing image would distort it...?

I just looked at this in PSCS,.

Resizing as you intend squashes the image down much too far,. it looks totally silly.

You can get a good 8x10 crop out of this though, the feet are already lopped off, so trimming to his knees and a little off the top to get 10" high and keep the full width @ 8 is really not bad at all, in fact given the sliced off feet, it makes it better.

EOSAddict wrote in post #3636502
But, surely, unless you crop to 8:10 aspect, any unconstrained resize of the existing image would distort it...?

Well, yah duh! That's kind of obvious.

But the OP stated that he wanted the entire shot in an 8 x 10 ("I want the whole photo in 8 x 10", "this whole image in 8 x 10"). Distortion or not, unchecking "constrain proportions" is the only way to get the entire image in an 8 x 10.

Rad

Radtech1 wrote in post #3636555
Well, yah duh! That's kind of obvious.

That's my point, guess I was too subtle

Try not to think of it as cropping it to a certrain size. But you're going to have to crop something out to get the proper size ratio otherwise it will look squished as mentioned already. I second the thoughts concerning the feet (toes) being cut off.

You don't really want an 8x10, you want the ratio of 8x10 (1.25:1) in order to print it out correctly on a print that is sized 8x10in.


Set your crop to 8x10 and simply move the corners around until you have your desired crop.


Your exif shows an image size of 48.667x32.44in which gives a ratio of 1.5:1, you simply want to crop out certain areas to get to 1.25:1.

You may still have a picture that, at full size, will be, for example, 40x32in. No need to resample or resize.

You'll simply print that pic on an 8x10in sheet.

Just print it full frame and you'll have a white boarder around it. You could even add a black rectangle around it to mimick what allot of the documentary guys used to do to (larger neg carriers to show the actual edges of the neg) . I think it looks great. So what theres a white boarder its better than cropping or distorting the image.

Why the push to keep the whole shot accepting the vertical squashing that will happen? There is enough room to crop to 8x10 and nothing all that interesting in the background any way? Just curious, that’s all.

danpass wrote in post #3636612
you simply want to crop out certain areas to get to 1.25:1

However, if he does that, he will loose some of the image which is contrary to his stated intention. Remember that the OP stated that he wanted the entire shot in an 8 x 10 ("I want the whole photo in 8 x 10", "this whole image in 8 x 10").

You are, in essence, telling him how to do what he said he did not want to do.

Rad

Crop box. Ratio is 8 and 10. Draw box on subject. Move box to suit. Crop. Go to image size and set the DPI to what you feel is good between 250-300. Most poeple can't resolve more than 280ish I read somewhere.

See what the size is...

If it's too small (I'm sure it will be) you need to grow the image by %10 increments until you get 8x10 inches at the DPI you want.

I personally use bicubic only. Then sharpen.