I realize the nature of my question maybe asking the impossible, but I have a low res image I downloaded from the internet, placed in an InDesign page, blew it up and printed it out. I was going for the distressed look that it has, it looks ok when I print it out considering it's low res and I blew it up fairly large. However, it's a little too pixelated to look professional when printed. Are they any tricks or things I can do to make it look higher res for print. I've attached the image as well as a screenshot of the InDesign file so you can see it in context.
I was wanting to know if there is a way stop part of a projected object from displaying if it is to far away from an alignment profile cut to be of any use.
I know in Revit you can set the deep of view from the section line not sure if you can do anything like this in Civil3d.
I am a Photoshop newbie and I have a series of graphics (all 72dpi from a website) that I would like to print in 300dpi. Is it possible to take a 72dpi .jpeg or .gif file and easily convert it to a higher resolution printable graphic? If Photoshop can't do it, is there any type of program that can?
Currently looking at buying either Lightroom 4 or Elements 11 at home - can I change image resolution and merge/join photos along with the standard photo editing - would be using this app for my travel pics, family photos and photobooks?
I'm want to add depth to my image. I've attached an image with the effect I'm looking for. Basically, it just makes the shape pop out just a little. I see they've did a fade around the edges, so I'm wondering what the easiest way to do this is. I achieved the same type of effect using the blend tool, fading the edges to black, but it's rather tedious and didn't look as good.
getting the best results when creating 3D images in Photoshop. I've been experimenting in the creation of 3D images using a 2D source using Photoshop CS5. The output is intended to be a lenticular print.
[URL]
I've achieved some good results by converting my single 2D image into multiple layers, creating 3D postcards and adjusting the parallax and focal plane. This gives a good illusion of depth in the image, but (in my experience at least) I can't get a layer to look like it's popping out of the screen.
I've also tried using a single image and creating a depth map from a greyscale image. This does work to make it look like the image pops out of the screen, but I can't get the same illusion of depth that I get in the other case without distorting the image.
What I'd like to do is combine both methods, using the depth map for the foreground layer and using parallax and focal plane settings for the background. Unfortunately I can't get this to work. If I use a semi-transparent layer as the basis for the depth map I get a light grey fringe around my target layer when I apply the greyscale mask and if I then try and set the parallax and focal plane settings as I would have in the first scenario, the layer with the depth map becomes unusable.
I have some third-party presentation software that requires all images be 8-bit. So I used Photoshop for all photo editing and made sure my PSDs were 8-bit before exporting stills (PNGs) for my presentation. 50+ PNGs were successfully created this way, but i'm having problems with a single file. When I open the correct files in Windwos Pic/Fax View, right click, show properties, go to Summery (advanaced), all the correct files have a bit depth listed as 24.
My problematic PSD says it's in 8-bit, but the PNGs that I create from it are consistently listed as having 32 bit depth in Windows Pic/Fax View. As a test I exported other images formats (TIFFs, JPEGs, etc...) and they all came out as 32 bit depth. How do I fix this? I tried opening the PSD, saving as different name, switching to 16-bit and then back to 8-bit, still didn't work.
I changed the background of a picture and I am satisfied so far, except for the end of the hall. The transition form where the hall ends and the green stuff I pasted begins. The edge is to hard or something. I don't know how to explain it but it is obvious that there can be made some progress there. How to make those edges more natural?
This is the original And this is the result (sofar)
I'm having a problem with Fcheck that no one seems to be able to solve - every time I import a large image it resizes it automatically to a fraction of its size. Notice in the image attached below that my image is 10000 x 10000 pixels but it imports and resizes to 25% of this original size.
According to the Autodesk Maya Online Help there is a command that will "Display images in full resolution preventing automatic rescaling of large images." ...that command is -F
My question to you is how and where do I enter that command? I'm using maya 2011 on Mac
Basically I just need to create a large scale depth map image...
I would like to somehow save the depth reading (in mm or inches) at each pixel of the image through a camera viewport. Currently, I'm using this script to save each reading in inches to a text file but it is really slow. I've learnt that OpenEXR can save a single floating-point channel image. Are there a faster way that I can save all the readings (in mm or inches) to .exr file or other format that support 32 bits single channel? If not, is it possible to scale the output (grayscale) floating point reading in exr to mm. (are they linear?) given that I set the minimum/maximum zdepth range.
script:
startFrame = 0 endFrame = 50 for frameNum = startFrame to endFrame do ( sliderTime = (int(frameNum)) fname = ("H:HAND_DATAdepthh" + (int(framenum) as string) + ".txt") myfile = createfile (fname) rbm = render outputsize: channels:#(#zDepth) vfbff for y=0 to 239 do (
I use lightroom with a very large image catalog. When I open lighroom I would like to be at the same point as I was before I closed lighroom or be at the very end (where the latest images are) of the catalog.
I just took some images as both RAW and JPEG images thinking I would see them as separate images in LR4. However I see them as a single image with a file name that says RAW + JPEG. They are separate images in my folder but I can't import them as separate images.
I just completed working on about 30 images that started out as horrable lighting and color. Most of thhem are Nikon RAW images I would like to compare my finished edited images with the ones I started working with.
I was wondering if it was possible to set a setting in Lightroom such that when looking through my images in the Library module, I only see the final edited image. For example, if I send the image to Photoshop to do any retouches, it creates a copy of the file. When I save the file in Photoshop, I then have two images in the Library module. However, I would like to keep all the history, but when browsing through my images I would only like to see the final image.
is there a way in LR (or bridge) to filter all images that are saved as 16 bit images.
i noticed i have a lot of scanned photos/slides that don´t need to be in 16 bit TIFF format.8 bit is enough for them and would save me a ton of HDD space (even when most of them are LZW compressed).
but i need a way to find them in my 80000 images database.so that i can make a further selection which of these 16 bit images i can convert to 8 bit.
I just built a new workstation PC, but since the motherboard has built in DVI, HDMI and Displayport outputs, I decided to wait with buying a dedicated GPU. The motherboard will use the intergrated graphics in the CPU instead. I will at some point buy a GPU, but mainly because I also play games on occasion.
However, now when I look at my images, they don't look as good as on my old computer with a dedicated GPU. This is true especially in the shadows where it seems the bit depth is very low. I was under the impression that a dedicated GPU won't have any impact on image quality other than for 3D rendering, games etc. Do I need set the bit depth somewhere? Maybe it's a driver thing?
My new system specs are as follows:
Intel i7-4770K Asus Z87-Pro motherboard 32GB RAM 500GB WD Velociraptor WIndows 8.1
So I am making digital color prints at 24x30. the photography work is about color fields and gradients, so I need super high res files. I have set the size to 24000x30000 pix at 1000 dpi..now my problem, when i go to save the gimp file as a jpeg i get this error message "JPEG image plug-in could not save image"
When I use the gradient tool in simple depth field in photoshop element 10 my whole image unblurs even when I chose a smal area to focus. It used to work well before but for one reason or another, it stopped. I uninstalled my program and that didn't fix the problem.
In my copy of Lightroom 5.3, image info tooltips do not show in the grid view expanded cells even though that option is activated in view options. Is this an issue with Lightroom 5.3? (Note: Image info tooltips in grid view compact cells and the filmstrip do display, however.)
Recently, Photoshop CS3 (installed on PC with Windows XP) has been changing the resolution of my images. I'll create an image and save it (as anything... jpg or png). When I close and reopen the image, its values have changes. For example: a 10 x 5" images at a resoltion of 300 will somehow change to 100 x 50 at a low resolution of something like 6. I'd like to know what causes this.
I have recently started stock photography websites as I am interested in pursuing selling my photography as such. A few of the sites I was looking at had requirements of 300 dpi. I assumed my photos were okay because I have a Canon Digital Rebel, but when I looked at the resolution in Photoshop, it was only 180 dpi.
Well - so here I go and do batch processing to 300 dpi, and yes - I did this to all of my photos. Thousands. It took me a week during my spare time.
Now I'm reading online that one should never actually enlarge their images - or "rezz them up" to larger sizes by selecting the "resample" box. Well - I did select the resample box. I didn't know!
My question is this: Have I ruined my photos? Can I go backward? Can I repeat the process by selecting 180 dpi (which is what they were to begin with) instead of the 300 dpi that I changed them to? Well, I guess I know that I "can" do that, but is it unrealistic to presume that the images will be back to normal?
How do i reduce the ppi's of a given image in the Photoshop CC? Changing it in the image size, in the Resolution field, it accomplish nothing. It logs an entry in the History panel, but nothing changes in the picture. Did Adobe changed how this works, or it's just a bug?