RESIZING IMAGES

"sarahandyo" wrote in message

Hi-can anyone help?
I have a 8x10inch image and want to resize it to 16×20 inches WITHOUT LOOSING THE RESOLUTION QUALITY….How do I do it? I am unsure the

difference

between ‘resizing’ and ‘resampling’? If anyone can help…PLEASE!

You have two choices. You can resize the image without resampling and Photoshop will alter nothing other than doubling the dimensions and cutting the resolution in half. All pixels will remain as in the original. If your 8×10 is at 300 ppi, your image will have 7,200,000 pixels (2400 x 3000). without resampling. Changing to 16 x20 without resampling, the number of pixels will stay exactly the same, but the resolution will cut in half to 150 ppi.

Or you can check resampling and Photoshop will double the dimensions but keep the original resolution. But to maintain the resolution, Photoshop will have to add pixels to the image that weren’t in the original (quadruple the amount). The new 16 by 20 will have 28,800,000 total pixels (4800 x 6000), a gain of 21,600,000. None of the pixels will be original pixels since Photoshop had to resample the entire image and make adjustments. But Photoshop is quite good at this and you may not notice that much of a difference.

In any event, you’ll want proportions constrained.

Peadge 🙂

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 15:45:57 -0800, "Peadge"
wrote:

Or you can check resampling and Photoshop will double the dimensions but keep the original resolution. But to maintain the resolution, Photoshop will have to add pixels to the image that weren’t in the original (quadruple the amount). The new 16 by 20 will have 28,800,000 total pixels (4800 x 6000), a gain of 21,600,000. None of the pixels will be original pixels since Photoshop had to resample the entire image and make adjustments. But Photoshop is quite good at this and you may not notice that much of a difference.

In any event, you’ll want proportions constrained.

Peadge 🙂

Can you also explain the choices in the box to the right of "ressampling"? ie how does each affect the resampling process.

"Jack" wrote in message

Can you also explain the choices in the box to the right of "ressampling"? ie how does each affect the resampling process.

They are basically the three types of interpolation you can choose to resample the image. From poorest quality to best quality, they are Nearest Neighbor, Bilinear and Bicubic. And for speed this sequence goes from fastest to slowest.

From Photoshop’s Help on Interpolation:

"When an image is resampled, an interpolation method is used to assign color values to any new pixels it creates, based on the color values of existing pixels in the image. The more sophisticated the method, the more quality and detail from the original image are preserved.

Nearest Neighbor (Jagged) for the fast but less precise method. This method is recommended for use with illustrations containing non-anti-aliased edges, to preserve hard edges and produce a smaller file. However, this method can result in jagged effects, which become apparent when distorting or scaling an image or performing multiple manipulations on a selection.

(Photoshop) Bilinear for a medium-quality method.

Bicubic (Smooth) for the slow but more precise method, resulting in the smoothest tonal gradations."

Peadge 🙂

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:52:21 -0800, "Peadge"
wrote:

From Photoshop’s Help on Interpolation:

"When an image is resampled, an interpolation method is used to assign color values to any new pixels it creates, based on the color values of existing pixels in the image. The more sophisticated the method, the more quality and detail from the original image are preserved.

Nearest Neighbor (Jagged) for the fast but less precise method. This method is recommended for use with illustrations containing non-anti-aliased edges, to preserve hard edges and produce a smaller file. However, this method can result in jagged effects, which become apparent when distorting or scaling an image or performing multiple manipulations on a selection.
(Photoshop) Bilinear for a medium-quality method.

Bicubic (Smooth) for the slow but more precise method, resulting in the smoothest tonal gradations."

Peadge 🙂

Thanks! I guess it really pays to RTFM 🙂

"Jack" wrote in message

Thanks! I guess it really pays to RTFM 🙂

It’s sort of a Catch 22. You need to know what to look up too. It’s like in school and asking how to spell a word. The teacher would say, "Look it up in the dictionary."
I’d reply, "I already know what the word means, I just want to know how to spell it. And I need to know how to spell it to look it up in the dictionary in the first place."

BTW, Photoshop has some vector shapes that already look like a donut. I think from Photoshop 6 on has them in the toolbar below the Type Tool. Custom Shapes.

Peadge 🙂

Try Qimage for all your resizing, conversion and printing needs. http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/

"Peadge" wrote in message

"Jack" wrote in message

Thanks! I guess it really pays to RTFM 🙂

It’s sort of a Catch 22. You need to know what to look up too. It’s like in
school and asking how to spell a word. The teacher would say, "Look it up in
the dictionary."
I’d reply, "I already know what the word means, I just want to know how to spell it. And I need to know how to spell it to look it up in the dictionary
in the first place."

BTW, Photoshop has some vector shapes that already look like a donut. I think from Photoshop 6 on has them in the toolbar below the Type Tool. Custom Shapes.

Peadge 🙂

I’m not sure why this is so, but when re-sizing your image it is best to do it in steps. No more than 10% at a time. Result will be better than if done in one fell swoop.

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:13:34 -0000, "sarahandyo" wrote:

Hi-can anyone help?
I have a 8x10inch image and want to resize it to 16×20 inches WITHOUT LOOSING THE RESOLUTION QUALITY….How do I do it? I am unsure the difference between ‘resizing’ and ‘resampling’? If anyone can help…PLEASE!

remove NOSPAM to reply