Newbie Question: Sizing Down

On 19 Feb 2007 05:14:55 GMT, Bovenone wrote:

I have some photos that I would like to size down. The reason being that they are lower quality and look better at a smaller size.

Here’s the problem.

I’m using a monitor that’s unacceptable to use a resolution of 1024×768. At that resolution the image is smaller and better, as I’m using an older monitor with a resolution of 800×600 and at that resolution the photos doesn’t look as good, especially when sized down.

My question is, is there a method of making the image smaller (20-50%) with less blur (with a resolution of 1024×768 the photos look sharp and good, and at 800×600 they look blurry and yucky when sized down!)?

Is there a plug-in that would work better for this?

TIA for any help,
Bovenone

You can go for Genuine Fractals
(you will see a troll here discrediting it, because he can not afford it), and you can even try a free trial.

Alternatively, open your photo and do a shift/ctrl/alt/S, or Filer/Save for Web
and resize it to what ever you want (800 X 600 or so)

Dave

On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 07:52:22 +0200, Dave scribbled:

On 19 Feb 2007 05:14:55 GMT, Bovenone wrote:

I have some photos that I would like to size down. The reason being that they are lower quality and look better at a smaller size.

Here’s the problem.

I’m using a monitor that’s unacceptable to use a resolution of 1024×768. At that resolution the image is smaller and better, as I’m using an older monitor with a resolution of 800×600 and at that resolution the photos doesn’t look as good, especially when sized down.

My question is, is there a method of making the image smaller (20-50%) with less blur (with a resolution of 1024×768 the photos look sharp and good, and at 800×600 they look blurry and yucky when sized down!)?

Is there a plug-in that would work better for this?

TIA for any help,
Bovenone

You can go for Genuine Fractals

And waste your money.

(you will see a troll here discrediting it, because he can not afford it), and you can even try a free trial.

That’d be me… oh, and just about everyone else who’s ever reviewed the product… but don’t let that stop you from throwing your money away or wasting your time.

You can go for Genuine Fractals
(you will see a troll here discrediting it, because he can

not afford

it), and you can even try a free trial.

Alternatively, open your photo and do a shift/ctrl/alt/S, or Filer/Save for Web
and resize it to what ever you want (800 X 600 or so)

Dave

Thanks for the reply. I’ll check it out.
Bovenone

In article ,
Bovenone wrote:

I’m using a monitor that’s unacceptable to use a resolution of 1024×768. At that resolution the image is smaller and better, as I’m using an older monitor with a resolution of 800×600 and at that resolution the photos doesn’t look as good, especially when sized down.

My question is, is there a method of making the image smaller (20-50%) with less blur (with a resolution of 1024×768 the photos look sharp and good, and at 800×600 they look blurry and yucky when sized down!)?

Is there a plug-in that would work better for this?

More information, please.

Forst, what kind of image is it? Is it an image with hard, sharp edges? A screen grab? A photographic image?

What do you plan to do with it? Web?

You’ll usually get best results downsizing using "Bicubic Sharper" in the Photoshop Image Size command.

—
Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

tacit wrote:

In article ,
Bovenone wrote:

I’m using a monitor that’s unacceptable to use a resolution of 1024×768. At that resolution the image is smaller and better, as I’m using an older monitor with a resolution of 800×600 and at that resolution the photos doesn’t look as good, especially when sized down.

My question is, is there a method of making the image smaller (20-50%) with less blur (with a resolution of 1024×768 the photos look sharp and good, and at 800×600 they look blurry and yucky when sized down!)?

Is there a plug-in that would work better for this?

More information, please.

Forst, what kind of image is it? Is it an image with hard, sharp edges? A screen grab? A photographic image?

What do you plan to do with it? Web?

You’ll usually get best results downsizing using "Bicubic Sharper" in the Photoshop Image Size command.

I don’t think PS will load with less resolution than 1024×768 unless its an early version.

Ill ask as well – What do you want to use the images for??

as you may be better off using Image Resizer from the XP Power Toys collection off the Microsoft site.

http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/Install/2/WX P/EN-US/ImageResizerPowertoySetup.exe

"Rob" wrote in message

tacit wrote:

In article ,
Bovenone wrote:

I’m using a monitor that’s unacceptable to use a resolution of 1024×768. At that resolution the image is smaller and better, as I’m using an older monitor with a resolution of 800×600 and at that resolution the photos doesn’t look as good, especially when sized down.

My question is, is there a method of making the image smaller (20-50%) with less blur (with a resolution of 1024×768 the photos look sharp and good, and at 800×600 they look blurry and yucky when sized down!)? Is there a plug-in that would work better for this?

More information, please. Forst, what kind of image is it? Is it an image with hard, sharp edges? A screen grab? A photographic image?

What do you plan to do with it? Web?

You’ll usually get best results downsizing using "Bicubic Sharper" in the Photoshop Image Size command.

I don’t think PS will load with less resolution than 1024×768 unless its an early version.

Ill ask as well – What do you want to use the images for??
as you may be better off using Image Resizer from the XP Power Toys collection off the Microsoft site.

http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/Install/2/WX P/EN-US/ImageResizerPowertoySetup.exe

I am using a new monitor at the highest settings (my first LCD) 1280×1024
I think most of my clients do not use such high res
so last night I looked at some new images I made at lower settings they look very sharp and good at my regular setting
if I put the same monitor on lower res they look all blurry and soft like they need unsharp mask at 300%!!

now I don;t know if the image files are good and just display poorly at lower res
and now I am worried they will look bad when viewed by others I know most people are using LCD now but not sure how they set their resolutions
windows defaults to a lower one
I did not see this using a CRT monitor, if I re-set the res lower the images were larger but not blurry
is this a quirk of LCD? I think it all looks like shit at lower settings especially the type.
I hate to over sharpen images if they don’t need it

what you think??

to the OP why spend $ on a plug in? get a newer monitor instead??

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:30:38 -0500, "KatWoman" scribbled:

"Rob" wrote in message

tacit wrote:

In article ,
Bovenone wrote:

I’m using a monitor that’s unacceptable to use a resolution of 1024×768. At that resolution the image is smaller and better, as I’m using an older monitor with a resolution of 800×600 and at that resolution the photos doesn’t look as good, especially when sized down.

My question is, is there a method of making the image smaller (20-50%) with less blur (with a resolution of 1024×768 the photos look sharp and good, and at 800×600 they look blurry and yucky when sized down!)? Is there a plug-in that would work better for this?

More information, please. Forst, what kind of image is it? Is it an image with hard, sharp edges? A screen grab? A photographic image?

What do you plan to do with it? Web?

You’ll usually get best results downsizing using "Bicubic Sharper" in the Photoshop Image Size command.

I don’t think PS will load with less resolution than 1024×768 unless its an early version.

Ill ask as well – What do you want to use the images for??
as you may be better off using Image Resizer from the XP Power Toys collection off the Microsoft site.

http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/Install/2/WX P/EN-US/ImageResizerPowertoySetup.exe

I am using a new monitor at the highest settings (my first LCD) 1280×1024
I think most of my clients do not use such high res
so last night I looked at some new images I made at lower settings they look very sharp and good at my regular setting
if I put the same monitor on lower res they look all blurry and soft like they need unsharp mask at 300%!!

now I don;t know if the image files are good and just display poorly at lower res
and now I am worried they will look bad when viewed by others I know most people are using LCD now but not sure how they set their resolutions
windows defaults to a lower one
I did not see this using a CRT monitor, if I re-set the res lower the images were larger but not blurry
is this a quirk of LCD? I think it all looks like shit at lower settings especially the type.
I hate to over sharpen images if they don’t need it

what you think??

to the OP why spend $ on a plug in? get a newer monitor instead??

LCDs only work well at their native resolution. Anything else will result in poor display quality.

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:30:38 -0500, "KatWoman"

I am using a new monitor at the highest settings (my first LCD) 1280×1024
I think most of my clients do not use such high res
so last night I looked at some new images I made at lower settings they look very sharp and good at my regular setting
if I put the same monitor on lower res they look all blurry and soft like they need unsharp mask at 300%!!

now I don;t know if the image files are good and just display poorly at lower res
and now I am worried they will look bad when viewed by others I know most people are using LCD now but not sure how they set their resolutions
windows defaults to a lower one

Now you have me worried.
I am using a 19" Acer AL1914 at 1280 X960 pixels.
Suddenly I wonder what my pics look like on other monitors. Apart from that, I do not even have a special calibrator. I know I must by a ‘spider calibrator’ or something to this effect. And I want a second kayak, and a new surf board,
as well as a rubber duck, and…

I did not see this using a CRT monitor, if I re-set the res lower the images were larger but not blurry
is this a quirk of LCD? I think it all looks like shit at lower settings especially the type.
I hate to over sharpen images if they don’t need it

what you think??

to the OP why spend $ on a plug in? get a newer monitor instead??

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 14:30:38 -0500, "KatWoman" found these unused words floating
about:

now I don;t know if the image files are good and just display poorly at lower res

probably correct.

and now I am worried they will look bad when viewed by others I know most people are using LCD now but not sure how they set their resolutions

I think it’s still less than 50% with LCD …

windows defaults to a lower one
I did not see this using a CRT monitor, if I re-set the res lower the images were larger but not blurry
is this a quirk of LCD? I think it all looks like shit at lower settings especially the type.
I hate to over sharpen images if they don’t need it

They probably don’t …

what you think??

to the OP why spend $ on a plug in? get a newer monitor instead??

An LCD is a hard cell monitor, in that each cell turns on or off with a hard edge. A CRT is a passing beam that has to excite phosphors for the display.

Bluntly, an LCD should never be run under its maximum resolution except if the image display is exactly set to 1/2 or 1/4 of the ‘native resolution’ of the LCD. Switching your 1280×1024 to 640×512 would give you larger image with four cells per original pixel – if the original image were, say, 800×600 and now set for 50% (400×300) -=or=- one pixel per cell, but you’d have to pan for an image at 100%.

Setting an LCD to display at 2/3rds its ‘native resolution’ [960×643] means that one cell in three must be ‘halfway’ between one pixel and the adjacent. That equals ‘blur’ in appearance. We found that out the hard way when LCD projectors first started being used in conferences!

Any other ‘resolution merely compounds the mapping of pixels into the LCD’s cells.

In article <k51Dh.9493$>,
"KatWoman" wrote:

I am using a new monitor at the highest settings (my first LCD) 1280×1024
I think most of my clients do not use such high res
so last night I looked at some new images I made at lower settings they look very sharp and good at my regular setting
if I put the same monitor on lower res they look all blurry and soft like they need unsharp mask at 300%!!

Correct.

If you set an LCD to any resolution other than its "native resolution," everything on that LCD will look bad. This is not just Photoshop images; even text, windows, buttons, and other objects on the screen will look poor.

—
Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

"tacit" wrote in message

In article <k51Dh.9493$>,
"KatWoman" wrote:

I am using a new monitor at the highest settings (my first LCD) 1280×1024
I think most of my clients do not use such high res
so last night I looked at some new images I made at lower settings they look very sharp and good at my regular setting
if I put the same monitor on lower res they look all blurry and soft like they need unsharp mask at 300%!!

Correct.

If you set an LCD to any resolution other than its "native resolution," everything on that LCD will look bad. This is not just Photoshop images; even text, windows, buttons, and other objects on the screen will look poor.

well thanks guys I am happy it’s the monitor look and not the files that look bad
all of them look good on CRT at any resolution