I use action macro to reduce 8x10s @ 300 dpi to 72 in a subfolder sent to clients by web for them to evaluate and choose preferred images. However, they get 2x3 images at the original dpi, so what they see on their monitor is too small to see differences. If uploaded to facebook etc. images look muddy. What am I doing wrong? Large files typically exceed Yahoo max. What can I do right?
Not sure what you are saying. DPI is meta. It's a concept that maps pixels to physical realworld units and viewing images on which you have reduced the overall pixel count in "dumb" viewers that don't care for DPI flags will display them 1:1 and may in fact dispaly the DPI info wrongly or based on their internal, arbitrary settings. or in otehr words: 100 pixels at 300 DPI are still only 100 pixels at 72DPI, but 1cm at 300 DPI contains 300 pixels while at 72DPI 1cm only contains 72. Reducing the pixel count will of course also reduce detail due to interpolation. Add to that JPEG compression and it's not gonna get better. So more or less, everything is as it should be based on your description. If you want them to be at ful lsize and contain the full details, then don't make them smaller. It's as easy as that.
Thanks for responding to my post. I downsize the files because, typically, I'm sending ten or twelve 8x10 headshots to a client for him to select one preferred. I do the original work @240 or 300 pixels/inch and then go to "image/size" and change the number to 72, since if I leave it at the larger number Yahoo won't accept such a large file, much less ten of them. With CS6, I seem to be getting the actual dimension of the image downsized when I change the resolution number even when I leave the size alone. Could I be pulling up a cache file and not the actual file I just worked on? Could my installation (by downloading, not a disc) be faulty?
P.S.- the odd resizing of the dimensions rather than the resolution change occurrs when I save the file into a new folder. When I press "save" everything on the monitor drop down is as I want it. Again, I do appreciate your helping me with this very much. Thanks.
Thanks for trying to help. Yes, this is what I do. It occurrs to me that maybe I'm pulling up a cache file rather than the one where I've just changed the resolution number and "saved" it to the new file. I've tried fixing the problem by re-doing the step you describe here for each file, not using the action macro. No luck. I save and close the "72" and when I reopen it I still get the 300 number and the 2x3 wide/high rather than 8x10. Thanks in advance for any more suggestions.
I do appreciate your attempt to help me. However, my clients don't have software to enlarge a 300rez image that's only 2x3, and I want them to have an 8x10 with a rez that their monitors work with (72), and it is frustrating to change the rez of an 8x10 down to 72, save it in a different folder, only to discover that the rez hasn't changed (what's a "save as" button for if not that?) but the size has come down to keep the pixl count the same. I can't send three or four, much less ten, 8x10s at 300 because Yahoo won't take files that large. Suggestions appreciated. Thanks.
The fact that what I suggested before isn't working is odd, and a concern. It works perfectly here, as expected.
Please verify that all the checkboxes shown in my earlier screenshot are checked. I previously suspected that your Action was faulty somehow, but if you are doing this simple thing manually with wonky results, then something else is definitely wrong. But never having experienced this problem before, I am at a loss as to what strange anomaly might be causing it.
Thanks, yes I think something is definitely wrong. I purge the high rez cache and change the resolution number in the drop-down, save that in the "web" folder and close the file, reopen it only to find the size is changed but not the high rez. Really wierd. The only thing that works is to go back to the original CR2 files (I keep on a CD) and re-do image at lower rez and save it as if the high rez version never existed. Is there any way to find a human voice at Adobe to get a re-installation of the downloaded CS6? Ellis Gaskell
[ admin - removed personal info ]
Is this a Creative Cloud membership, or a regular app download? If not Creative Cloud, then you should be able to uninstall and reinstall. There should be an "uninstall" app there with your faulty Photoshop.
PLEASE check out this thread before you uninstall though! http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1006208 -- as in, make sure you can re-download your purchase if you don't still have the installer. With both uninstaller and installer, you should be fine. If you are Creative Cloud, the procedure may be different.
Added support phone number link.
So, as I understand your problem, you are down-sampling 8x10 images from 300 PPi to 72 PPI (going from 2400 px x 3000 px to 576 px x 720 px). The down-sample part is working correctly, but the metadata (the info in the image file that describes PPI and thus print size) is showing 300 PPI and the smaller print size. Is this correct?
What happens if you down-sample then go File> Save for Web, which will strip the metadata?
It sounds like you are getting the pixel size you want, just an incorrect PPI. (Don't place so much importance on PPI. Most times it is an insignificant bit of information)
you are correct about what I've been doing. Have given up sorting "ppi" and am thinking simply in "resolution" -- the lower 72 for sending files via Yahoo to clients. Since CS6 installation (via download, not cloud) clients are complaining that images are too small. Sure enough, when I bring up the "web folder" images they're 2x3, not 8x10, and/but still at the high rez. Will try "save for web" and remake action. Will post result later today. Thanks for the suggestion. Ellis Gaskell
[ admin - removed personal info ]
Not to go off topic...
This gets back to what I've harped about for years: the term "resolution" being used to describe both the total number of pixles in an image AND the PPI of an image creates confusion. They are two very distinct and different things.
I like the term pixel density as a replacement for "resolution" when describing PPI.
Am not sure if you've managed to resolve your DPI issue, but i'm using the old photoshop 6 and having the same issues....has anyone come to any defintive solutions or have a solid strategy to get round this?
If I change dpi before I change size, things go ok. Hard to believe that the sequence of the changes makes a difference but I'd swear it does. Totally unconfirmed by anyone else.
[ personal info removed by admin - please be more careful in what you post to a public forum ]