working with large files

[Levada]

Number of pixels, that's all you have to remember, that's all what counts. Forget about dpi or canvas size, the more pixels you use, the better the quality.

[Haiku]

That doesnt exactly answer my question or least I am not sure. I always work in " so if I have a file that is 36"x24" or at least it has to be when printed do I say work at 18"x12" and then when I finish increase the size to original then print. thanks in advance

[halo]

no, you dont.

[Levada]

It's all about pixels Haiku, trust me on that. Photoshop can not raise a magic wand and add the extra pixels when ever you need them (unless you don't care about quality), it can't do wonders. What you got is what you got, that's the basic issue here.

[halo]

http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/photoshop/l/bllps502d.htm

[Maven]

If you want a final product at 36"x24" 300dpi then you need to work in that rez too. working in a lower rez then using image size to increase the dpi will give you undesired results.

When I work in large formats like that I use Adobes large file format it's bit faster when saving and opening.

[sambrade]

I start of by blocking out the overall colours at around 100dpi. This means you can work quickly with large brushes. Then when i want to add detail i ramp the res up to 300dpi. Thsi gives great results and lets you work efficiently with larger files.

[Haiku]

ok I think I got it now thanks for your guys help.
Maven what do you mean by adobe's large format

[Levada]

Maven what do you mean by adobe's large formatIt's Adobe's Large Document Format (PSB), first introduced in CS and supporting 300,000x300,000 pixels and 54 channels and not backward compatible with earlier versions. You can enable it in preferences under file handling.

[Haiku]

thank you Levada I had no idea about this feature :thumbsup:

[EricChadwick]

What do you people think about Genuine Fractals (http://www.lizardtech.com/products/gf/whatis.php), Stair Interpolation (http://www.fredmiranda.com/SI/index.html), and the like?

Looks like no silver bullet, but intruiging nonetheless.

[allenatl]

Genuine Fractals has been mentioned in other threads and I haven't used it but there have also been several discussions on Adobe forums saying that Photoshop CS new resample options, bicubic smoother and bicubic sharper, work just as good as Genuine Fractals. I avoid resampling except as a last resort but several people on the Adobe forums say
they have gotten substantially better results with the new CS options.

[halo]

What do you people think about Genuine Fractals (http://www.lizardtech.com/products/gf/whatis.php), Stair Interpolation (http://www.fredmiranda.com/SI/index.html), and the like?

Looks like no silver bullet, but intruiging nonetheless.

there aren't any magic bullets, and while each method does have benefits over others under certain circumstances and under certain examinations the sort of clients that lead you down the path of forcing you to up res by not supplying correctly sized images aren't the ones that would ever notice the difference between them and PS's methods...certainly 99.99% of users wouldnt either once the image was in production. None of them can work low res web gfx into high res print art, which i think is what some people would like to hear....the lower res the image the more all of these methods fall flat on their arse, just like the normal ones.

The best method is to avoid the need to do it in the first place. :)

[VFX Follower]

The question you have to ask yourself is, what is the target output? If you are going to print, then I would work with at least 150 dpi.(300 dpi is the recommended print res.) DPI does matter. Yes, the more pixels you have the better the quality, but you have to tell photoshop how to interpret those pixels, and that is through the dpi. An image that is going to be published on the internet or TV screen only has to have a dpi resolution of 72. That is why it is set as the default resolution when you create a new image in Photoshop.

Once you figure out your target for your artwork, the rest is easy. A good rule-of-thumb is to always create your artwork bigger than you need it; if your system can handle it. By creating it larger than the target size, you give yourself more options when it comes time to export or use your artwork. By creating an oversized drawing that you had intended for the web, you give yourself the means to print it, if you choose to. You just have to think ahead.

As far as Genuine Fractals is concerned, it works great if you have good images to work with. Genuine fractals is for taking small(printable: 300dpi +) images and up-converting them for large signs and billboards. You can use it for other things but you have to keep in mind, crap-in = crap-out. If you take a 72 dpi image that you saved from the internet and expect Genuine fractals to increase the overall size and dpi to print quality, good luck to ya. It just isn't gonna happen. It works good for intermediate up-conversions and the such. The extreme conversions require insane image and dpi sizes.

Now the 36" x 24" size will most likely be a good canidate for the PSB format. If you have CS or CS2, then you are in luck. This format is just like PSD, except it was built to handle large file sizes more effectively inside photoshop. Give this file format a try if you are experiencing some serious slow-downs.

I hope this helps your endeavors,

JB...

[mazm]

first of all i don't trust in any filter or Appz increase rez. if you think from where it'll be large.
i tried all these things and resize the dame file by the same ratio, the same result.
if you want to work in large file open your new document in your final size and don't resize you file more than 20% and this percent is the maximum. it'll take time if you start in large file but it's save and give you the best quilty you need.

[Timrek]

I know that I am a bit late to the conversation but I hope this helps someone out there.

If you are working with PS 7 or before and you don’t have the PSB format. Try creating your image at half the intended output size. For example, if you want a final image that is 24"x36" and 300 dpi, create an image that is 12"x18" and 300 dpi. When you go to print there is a handy little feature in the print dialog to print at a % of the original. just put in 200% and you get your 24"x36" back. I have used this in the past and not seen any noticeable degradations in the print quality.

As a side note, I have not done this with super complex or highly detailed works, mostly architectural renderings and the like.

Hope it helps.

:wavey:

[halo]

thats probably down to a limitation of the output rather than a compliment to the idea.

There is a lot of room for manouver in upresing images, knowing when and why is more important than how.

[Timrek]

Halo,

Thanks for the input as, imho, lame as it was. I was offering up some help and a suggestion to all out there. I stated that it may not be the best solution for every one. You do know a lot more about the program then I do but that does not mean that you have to criticize me or any one else. If you don't like my, or any one else’s, solution or post then please in the future feel free to not say anything.

What's the old saying? Better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you a fool then to open it and prove them right.

Or, do you just alwyas need to have the last word?

[halo]

**** yeh, why do i bother? i've wasted a decade doing everything at the proper res...i could have just done it all at 1/2 size...shit why didn't we all think of that? ****, cheers you've just revolutionised the digital industry....hang on everyone, we dont need to do it that big because you can't see any obvious problems.

i was simply stating that although your "solution" may work under your circumstances thats likely because the output isn't capable of showing you the deficit between having a correct res file over on that has been upres'd by whatever method or that the source wasn't too clever in the first place. Thats not a strength of the method, its a weakness of your output and doesn't apply to all scenarios.

To expand on that, certain outputs are kind to image quality problems because they aren't that fantastic at reproduction, but some outputs are very hard on image quality which limits your potential for enlargement. Try it on a 16k 10x8 tranny or a lambda and see what shows up...in fact try it on anything 1/2 decent.

if you think its lame to try and get people to understand when and why they should be doing something over just telling them how, then fine, crack on.

Purpetuating the myth that its fine do just quad the image resolution to get a 2x file image size is lame full stop...no matter by what method and to a certain extent what the source or output is.

[Timrek]

Halo,

You are sooo right I am such a jerk for ever questioning you or offering my crappy advice. You are so mighty and powerful we should all bow down to you and your obviously powerful skills.

Here let me go get a step ladder so that I can help you down off that cross.

[EricChadwick]

There is a vast range of output needs, so nobody's wrong here. Seems there's also quite a range of egos around here. Cool it down guys.

Might be a good time to review the rules on the Reply To Thread page.

[halo]

hey, carry on insulting me if you want to...

if you want me to explain in detail the reasons why you may not be noticing the difference, and how ppi relates to dpi, then effect of screen ruling against levels of grey vs detail etc then fine.

this has to be the net for someone to get so ****ing unhappy because a caveat was pointed out in their method...if someone pointed out to me why i was wrong or mistaken or or mislead or using a technique that was unwise i would be all ears, after all knowledge helps...but whatever.

here>>>>> is this one of your toys? i'll just pop it back in your pram for you.

[leigh]

Hey, knock it off guys.

[kwan_tohau]

If my computer is not able to work with such big file size,but i still need good quality.
How can i do then?
Thanks a lot!!

[EricChadwick]

Buy more RAM. 2GB is a good amount to have, although others who use Photoshop more for print jobs might have a different recommendation.

RAM isn't very expensive.

[Finster]

-Buy more ram.
-Clear space on your hard drive for disk cache.
-Optimize your hard drive.
-Allocate more memory to Photoshop, if possible.
-Quit all other programs, possibly need to restart to free up memory (Illustrator was bad at one time with "reserving" memory on a Mac and you had to restart to free it up).
-Turn off all extensions/extras. On a Mac you can make a special login just for Photoshop and really strip down any extras that you might run.
-Sorta extreme, but work in sections if possible then stitch together at the end.
-Work in RGB over CMYK then save to output format at the end.
-Oh yeah, and buy more ram :).

If you have high contrast areas or hard edges (logos, type, lines, etc.), you will need 300dpi at final output size. Even that can produce unacceptable results sometimes (I prefer to keep all type/line art in vector format). If your artwork is more abstract with gradual transitions and no hard edges, you can get away with a lower res (as low as 150), but you will have to make the call if it is acceptable to you or not.

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.