-
Posts
207,305 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3,267
Everything posted by Damien Symonds
-
Ok, you didn't mention HDR in your original post, but it doesn't change anything. Please PLEASE don't wait too long to learn to do this properly. Ok, so this is where the BS is most evident. You've probably spotted it yourself. Jpeg files are 8-bit. And once data is 8-bit, it can never be genuine 16-bit again. So for your software (PTGUI) to tell you that it has magically turned your 8-bit jpegs into a 16-bit tiff is nonsense, of course. The Tiff part is a good idea, but the 16-bit part is just big-noting itself. Is the tiff file layered?
-
How did it turn out, @Rae?
-
Bridge for Elements 11
Damien Symonds replied to Shsp00's topic in Photoshop / Elements / Bridge / ACR questions or problems
How did you go, @Shsp00? -
@Crystal Felton?
-
Are you still there, @PSikes?
-
The answers to your questions lie, most likely, in resolution (PPI). No it doesn't. Increasing the size of a photo makes it neither worse nor better quality. It just makes it larger. If you had a print of a photo, and looked at it at arm's length, and it looked good, you'd be satisfied. If you then held that same print REALLY close to your nose, it would be much bigger to your eyes. Would you complain that it was suddenly a bad print? Of course not - it's exactly the same print, you're just looking at a much closer view. No it doesn't. The only possible explanation for this is that you're viewing at greater that 100%. Never do that. Good. Never use anything else. Right. And this is the clue. This statement is why I suspect you're messing up the resolution (ppi) when resizing. So, talk to me about your process. Firstly, what resolution does your lab require for prints?
-
Definitely haven't changed my mind. https://www.facebook.com/damien.photoshop/photos/a.183682458346830.39021.183680248347051/1711588222222905/?type=3&theater
-
Bit depth isn't really related to panoramas. I mean, if you like using 16-bit, and have sufficient computer power to do so, there's no reason not to. However, if you're a good photographer, there's really no benefit to it. High-bit data is necessary for photos where you need to make large tonal shifts (eg aggressive Levels or Curves) in Photoshop. As long as you manage your light well, shoot in raw format, and edit your raw files properly before taking the photos to Photoshop (or any other pixel editing program), 8-bit should be perfectly fine. May I know a bit more about your editing workflow? How do you make your panoramas?
-
It can mean that, but it definitely doesn't automatically mean that. In fact, sometimes smaller jpeg file size actually means BETTER print quality, because it indicates a less noisy file. So, I hope the article has helped you understand why your jpeg files are much smaller than the raw files. That's very natural. One aspect that the article doesn't discuss, however, is the loss of quality each time you save another jpeg. And this is where you fucked up. It's because of Lightroom, of course, and I sincerely hope that you will abandon that shit very soon. Next, please read this article and let me know when you have done so.
-
Bridge for Elements 11
Damien Symonds replied to Shsp00's topic in Photoshop / Elements / Bridge / ACR questions or problems
No, there is no need for an alternative. Bridge is free, and works with Elements just the same as Photoshop. I discuss its installation and setup in the free module here. PLEASE don't wait a moment to take the Bridge Class.