Damien Symonds

@Kellie W, PLEASE post some photos in the Raw Class. Don't let your class membership dwindle away - make me work hard for your money. Let me see what you've been shooting lately, and let me help make it as beautiful as it can be.

How did you ever go with this, @Tina B.?

Well, let's not imagine magical powers that don't exist. They're still raster files (and how!). Having them as smart objects just prevents degradation.

You probably already know this, but just to make sure - never copy and paste the design elements into your layout. Only File>Place, or drag and drop from Bridge. This ensures they come in as Smart Objects. Smart Objects can be resized and rotated as many times as you like, and they never lose their original quality. This is vital for this kind of work.

If I hadn't seen the "before" I doubt I would have been able to spot what you'd done. Well done. But I think the area circled in green is oddly darker than the area circled in red:

Right. So, for future reference (for these maps), here's a rough guide: For anything under 12 inches (12 grid squares) wide, use 300ppi. For 12-16 inches, use 250ppi For 16-20 inches, use 200ppi For 20-30 inches, use 150ppi For anything larger than 30 inches, use 100ppi (Please note, this does not apply to photography - I'm only providing it for these maps.) Make sense?

Do you mean there are twenty six grid squares across, and sixteen and a half grid squares down?

Linda?

Wonderful. Let me know what you hear.

I cannot stress strongly enough the danger that lurks here. You need to find out exactly which CMYK they need. It will be the difference between lovely posters, and shit you wouldn't line a wardrobe with.

My cousin's daughter has Alopecia <3 She's so amazing.

Please read: https://www.damiensymonds.net/2011/05/please-be-wary-of-cmyk.html Also this: https://www.damiensymonds.net/cmyk-rgb-files-press.html Regarding file format, it will be PDF. You must read this also: https://www.damiensymonds.net/2010/05/making-pdfs-from-photoshop.html

Oh, there are a thousand issues to worry about here. I'm SO glad you posted. First, can you show me exactly what instructions the lab gave you? About CMYK, about resolution, about file format, about bleed ... everything.

Please please PLEASE answer the question. How many grids are there? How many inches across and down?

That's right. Each one with exactly the same settings (don't forget to look at the blend modes). Don't bother selecting first. Just start by adding the layers to the whole photo (making it all blue) then go back and mask the B/C layer later.

Let me ask the question a different way. Did you know the biggest size somebody could possibly want to print it?

Just add these layers on top of your other layers. No need to re-do anything.

Here you go: Download PSD file It's not perfect, but it's the best I can manage for Elements.

This is such a complex issue, but it boils down to this: No matter what the size or pixel dimensions or resolution, the print will only ever be as good as the poorest-quality element of it. And I can see from what you provided that the quality of some of the elements is pretty poor. This would have been an issue no matter whether you began with a 72, 240, 300, 600, 1000 or 3000 ppi file. The smallest, crappiest graphic in your collection is still the smallest and crappiest, no matter what. On screen, and in print (at any size) it will still be crappy. Am I making sense so far? Now, we could make this argument: Make the file at the same low resolution as the smallest crappiest element. Shrink all the other elements down to match it. Then, when you come to print, enlarge it all really aggressively. It'll all look terrible, but at least it will all be exactly the same amount of terrible. It'll be perfectly consistent. Or, you could do what you appear to have done - made a high resolution file, allowing the best elements to look their best, and the small crappy elements to continue to look small and crappy. This approach means everything is wildly inconsistent, but at least some parts of the image are sharp. Am I still making sense so far? I have another question for you - did you know, before you started making this, what size it would be needed to be printed?

How about this?

Thank you. Do you have reason to believe Kelly has used Puppet Warp on her photo? It seems likely that she posed the baby like that?

Please don't upload other people's photos. It's exceptionally bad manners. You definitely wouldn't like it other people were doing it with your photos. Provide a link please.

I've moved this thread into Ask Damien, since it's not a class question. Can you take the 100% crop properly? https://www.damiensymonds.net/2013/09/grabbing-700x700px-100-crop.html

Thanks Steve!

Hi Gail, are they photographs or scans? I mean, was the source of the files a camera, or a scanner, or something else?