Photoshop :: Clear Zoom Out - Large Images
Aug 5, 2012This is a 4K image, zoomed out, it closely resembles a grid, although you would never know. I want a clear view when zoomed out of my grid.
View 18 RepliesThis is a 4K image, zoomed out, it closely resembles a grid, although you would never know. I want a clear view when zoomed out of my grid.
View 18 RepliesThe scratch disk fills up as I edit and I need to close CS6 to empty the directory.
Â
THe result is that everything slows down!!
Im creating a label for my CD, and I created the images with PS7 & then imported them into coreldraw in EPS format to do the text. (I heard that vector programs create cleaner, crisper text than bitmap programs,and my fonts are between 8 - 10 size). I added my text & some vector clipart then printed it directly from CorelDraw & the text & clipart was super crisp but the imported image was gritty, so I exported the entire file back into PS7 in Corel EPS format. I printed it in PS7 & the reverse happened: The image was nice & clean & the text was gritty. Am I importing/exporting in some wrong fashion, or there a way to have both my images & text come out crisp & clean?
View 7 Replies View RelatedI am designing large signs in corel draw ( 29 feet x 15 feet ). When I zoom out it only goes to 3%. Is there a way to let corel let me work with larger signs?Â
View 1 Replies View RelatedHow do I fix blurry prints of clear screen images?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI installed LR3 and have been using for approximately a year. I did a horrible job importing my photos, it's a mess. Basically what I want to do is wipe out all the images and catalogs and "start over" importing images. My previous edits are of little concern.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have images from old photographs and drawings that I want to enlarge to A3 sent files to printers and they are only 150dpi Printer ran off 13 proofs (out of 125) for me only 6 of a quality I can just about get away with using...Is there anyway I can increase DPI on images to achieve 300dpi to give me a clear print
View 8 Replies View RelatedI just purchased x6. Here's what I'm trying to do...
I am a composer and I want to create "score perusal" videos of my music which I will upload to YouTube and embed on my website. I compose using a software notation program called Finale. There are two "views" in Finale:
1. Page view: the score looks just like an actual score with pages numbers, the notes, words, etc. showing one page at a time
2. Scroll view where the score is laid out horizontally.
In either view, I can "play" the score while a green line follows the music, turning pages (in page view) or scrolling horizontally (in scroll view). I can also "print" the pages as PDFs (but not as images).
Here's what I've tried in VSx6:
1. Using Screen Capture, I recorded the score as it scrolled across the screen. I put that Screen Capture in the video track and then imported the audio into the music track and synced it up. In VSx6 when I played it back using "project," the score looks bad (fuzzy). If I play back only the scrolling score (iow, no audio) it looks good (not razor sharp but legible), however, it can't afford to lose any sharpness or it will become too fuzzy. I have read on this forum that I should ignore such the quality before the movie is created (rendered?) and that all be well when saved as a movie.
2. From Finale I exported each page as a PDF (that my only choice). Concerted the PDFs to .png files. I tried normal and high quality. The higher quality (larger) the png file, the worse it looked in VS. Using a movie template, I put the .png files in as "pictures" (pages) and then, again, I synced the music.
I've tried saving the above in about every format available but seem clear enough, especially once they get uploaded to youtube.
I know there are many parameters. The two most important things are size, that is, I want the score to go from top to bottom of the frame since the notes are small, and of course, clarity... crisp as possible.
-Do I want 60p/50 editing checked under "Settings"? I can't see what it does.
-I assume I want 4:3 ratio since these are portrait pages?? (If I have 16:9 unchecked, does that mean 4:3 becomes the default?)
-In screen capture, does a higher quality monitor make a clearer picture, or does it not matter?
-In YouTube I note that one has to click the gear and then select 1080p. If Auto is set then it seems to play at 720p? I've only come close to what I need by setting it to 1080p but I fear many will not even know that setting is there.
Bottom, line, is it possible to get a clear enough image on YouTube or is this just not doable? I haven't tried printing (in ink) the score then scanning the pages and loading them into a movie. Is that a better option perhaps?
I'm using Photoshop CS6 to assemble and export a series of extremely high-res tiles. Long story short, they will be used to make up a large map in a mobile app.
Â
I have a pretty tight deadline and I've just been stopped in my tracks by an error I get when I try to scale them up.
Â
Each tile is a layered PSB file, 16384 x 16384px at 72dpi, about 2-3GB in size. All I want to do is scale them up to double their size - 32768 x 32768px.
Â
When I try to do this, I receive the error, 'Could not complete the Image Size command because the result would be too big'.
Â
What exactly does this mean in terms of size (filesize or pixel dims)? What's the problem?
Â
Since I'm working in PSB format and I'm resizing within the bounds of the 300,000px limit, I don't understand why I'm not permitted to scale up to 32768px.
Â
I need to preserve the layers as Smart Objects in order to upscale them... so no flattening.
Â
All I can think of is splitting the files into smaller tiles (I currently have 28 tiles to upscale).
This is probably a basic one for most people, but I'm pretty clueless... I've got a fairly large image (3000px) that I need to scale down to 500-ish px. How do I best go about doing this without getting that awful 'halo' effect? I've tried gradually scaling down without much success.
View 5 Replies View RelatedI'm currently working on a huge image and remembered that a version of Photoshop used to have the function that would allow you to open one section of a huge image at a time to work on. From what I can recall you used to go to open the image and a Navigator looking window would pop up and you'd choose which area of the image you would like to work on, click ok and it would load just that area. Is this feature still around?
View 5 Replies View Relatedis there a fast way to resize a large amount of images?
View 2 Replies View RelatedI'm going to take a family portrait photo and touch it up a little before printing it. Thing is ... I will be printing at least a size 16'' by 20'' photo. I'm not familiar with working with images this large. When I have it printed I want to be sure that the photo looks clear/normal.
I would appreciate any advice anyone could give me in regard to...
1) What color mode works best for quality printing results
2) How I should crop for best results
3) How to save file to ensure best printing results
How to replicate this issue. This is on Win7 x64 with PS CS6. On an infrequent basis, when I zoom in on one open image, the same zoom magnification will be applied to all the other images I have open. When this happens and I have several image files open, you can imagine it's annoying to have to reset the view for all those open images.
Â
It looks like the zoom inheritance sometimes happens when I drag a layer from a zoomed-in image onto another open image window that's at a different zoom magnification. But it doesn't happen every time.
Â
If this is a "feature" how to avoid or disable it.
As a long time Photoshop user I regularly use batch automation in my normal daily routine but there is something I would like some help on...
Currently I have a folder that is filled with hi-res retouched images and I have a batch set up to save each file first as a large (web optimized) version in one folder and then as a smaller thumbnail version in another folder.
This is how I usually save the images but when I submit them they all need to be inside a single folder with specific extensions explaining the size of the file (ie the original file named "file123" would be saves as two versions called "file123_large" and "file123_thumb") in the same folder...
Is there a way I can add these extensions onto the file when it's being optimized for the web? I've always renamed these manually and it's just so repetitive and seems like a waste of time.
I want to output jpg files as a slide show (not video) to various large LCD screens. Can someone advise me of the best image pixel dimensions and ppi for this? I have tried 4256 x 2835 at 300 ppi as generated by the psd file and it looks dreadful on a large screen. I don't have ready access to large screens, so I am not able to experiment myself. Also, when resizing images (both increase and decrease) is it best to have the "resample" box in "image size" ticked or not?
View 4 Replies View RelatedI work at an architectural company and I need to resize a lot of images in our database. We’re talking about roughly 40.000 images, but that is not the hurdle.Previously I have made an action that resizes my images in two steps, because I need them in two different qualities When I open the image and runs the action, it does something like this:
Â
Convert mode: Convert to RGBSave: As JPEG, quality 10, and in a certain folderImage size: width 800px, constrain proportionsSave: As JPEG, quality 8, and in another folderClose Now I want to make a change to that action, by resizing the image two times instead of one.I want it to look something like this:
Â
Convert mode: Convert to RGBImage size: width 4000px, constrain proportions (BUT ONLY IF THE IMAGE SIZE IS LARGE ENOUGH, OTHERWISE LEAVE IT AS IT IS)Save: As JPEG, quality 10, and in a certain folderImage size: width 800px, constrain proportionsSave: As JPEG, quality 8, and in another folderClose
How can I do this? Do I need to add a variable or?
I have a very large PDF that I need to open in Photoshop (It is a template image). The size of the image is 125.9843" x 91.5354".
Â
However, when I open in Photoshop the image is automatically resized to about 106" x 79". I have tried to manually input the dimensions upon opening the file, however, when I open the file and check "Image Size" the dimensions are 106" x 79" again.
Â
I can open the image in Illustrator at the correct dimensions automatically, and the PDF file itself is at the correct dimensions.
Â
[I am using Photoshop CS5.1]
If I have 4 or 5 images I need to merge with each other (not on top of each other, but alongside each other) to form one larger image..how do I do it?
I want to desaturate the images and then merge them and add a colour wash over the top of them.
I require an option or method to convert a large number of jpeg files from a folder to progressive jpegs, with a single save option. Currently I have to save the jpeg file indiviudally for every files as progressive jpeg, Can I know if there is an option to perform this action.
View 2 Replies View RelatedHow can I get Elements 9 to show me thumbnails of my large file images? When I tweak them with CS5 Elements won't show them in the Organizer.
View 4 Replies View RelatedWhen stitching together a large panorama, the content aware tool doesn't work if the image is >30,000 pixels. When you use the tool on large images (after I have flattened the layers and using the magic wand to select a white area at the top), it runs through the process as if it is going to fill and then after the "fill" window completes, the selected area remains white.
Â
I noticed on some other forum posts that jpg saving couldn't occur on >30,000 pixel width images, so I changed the image size to 29,999 (from ~39,000) and the content fill tool worked.
I'd like to resize a large batch of images to a more manageable size. I shoot a lot of weddings and find when shooting with my Nikon D800, the files are enormous when shooting Raw. Until now I would export all my vertical images first to a folder and then the horizontal ones and then resize in photoshop to say 11x17. Is there a way to resize ALL my images before I even bring them into photoshop? I'd like to resize them all (both vert and horizontal images) at one time. If I select the batch of images I'd like to resize, and them click export, it takes me to a menu which gives me the option to resize. I just don't know what settings I should use? Can I just click width and height and punch in say 11x17 and leave it at 300dpi? I want to preserve the aulaity for print purposes but reduce the file size so it's manageable for both my client and me when I then go into Photoshop to edit.
View 8 Replies View RelatedI have GIMP 2.8.8 installed on Ubuntu 13.10 amd64. The machine has 32Gb of RAM, and in GIMP preferences I have changed "Maximum new image size" to 4Gb and "Maximum undo memory" to 12Gb. However, if I try to open a large image in GIMP. it crashes while trying to open it - for example, this 15427 x 12549 pixel tif image available from the European Southern Observatory web site: [URL]
When I try to open this or similar sized images, the progress bar at the bottom of the file open dialog goes across to 100%, then GIMP stops responding for 10 or 15 seconds, and then the entire GIMP window disappears with no error message from either GIMP or the operating system, System Monitor shows no gimp process running, and the only entry I can find at the relevant time in any of the log files in /var/log is this:
Nov 22 06:15:36 nick-desktop kernel: [ 1458.563084] traps: gimp-2.8[4160] trap int3 ip:7f508c2dd3d9 sp:7fff6768a050 error:0
The same problem happens if I try to create a new large image - select New from the file menu, enter 12000 pixels for the width and height in the dialog, and OK. After 10 or 15 seconds of no response, the GIMP window vanishes. I can open or create and work on smaller images without any problem.
I also have the Windows version of Gimp 2.8.8 installed on my laptop, which is running Windows 8.1, and there I have no problem opening or creating the exact same images.
I have a series of images taken with different settings and I want to quickly compare them at 1:1 in different areas of the image, center and corners. I have discovered that if I select the series I want to examine and then go to the first image and zoom that image to the position that I wish to when I use the arrow keys to move to each subsequent image will be shown zoomed into the same position
Â
If I don't ever go to any of the other images and zoom anywhere this works just fine. The zoom location is remembered just for the first image. However, if i accidentally or deliberately zoom on one of the other images it will remember that zoom location forever which breaks the technique described above.
Â
how to remove the remembered zoom location from an image like it is when you first import it into LR?
I am working with some very large images in X5, ~ 2500 mm x 1200 mm at up to 600 DPI sometimes. (And before you say it, yes, I do need this. It is a very specific application that we work on daily and I do need the ability to basically control every single pixel at that size & that resolution). I'm using WinXP 32-bit (company mandate).
When I need precisely sized objects, I am using CorelDRAW and occasionally when I need pixel perfect placement, PhotoPaint gets the call. The images may go through both before it runs through a final backend processor (some specialized software) and then going to print.
The problem is that I am running into limits when I go beyond 300 DPI (depending on the image dimensions). For example, CorelDRAW often will fail to export a TIFF correctly when I try a 450 DPI image at that size (some TIF file comes up but nothing can load it, it's corrupted). Or for even smaller images, if I enable transparent background, I also get a similar problem. Sometimes, e.g. Photo Paint, just chokes up with out of memory problem and fails to load images at all.
Thing is, we actually have Photoshop CS5 available and while there are many things I don't like about it, it actually can handle stuff of this size. So there is also a push to get Illustrator as well under the same assumption that it will work. However, Adobe stuff is way more expensive, feels more bloated and slower and (for me at least) a pain to use compared to Corel, so I'd rather not.
Would moving to 64-bit WinXP work? Or would I need to go to CorelDRAW X6? This is already a quad-core machine with 4GB of RAM.
Im new to both coreldraw, and to the graphtec cutter, so my problem may have a very simple answer. Ive been playing around with it, learning how things work. Smaller images are no problem, but Im having trouble cutting larger images.
the plotter can cut up to a width of 610mm, and Im using 610mm vinyl. I need to cut some items that are 600mm wide. First time I tried, it left a gap on the left side of approx 50mm. It also stopped cutting approximately 20mm from the right side. next time, I loaded the vinyl into the machine 45mm further right and tried again. this time the left hand edge was positioned where I expected, but the right side still stopped in the same place as previously, leaving a gap of around 70mm on the right hand side. you would think I was trying to cut something bigger than the capacity of the cutter, but obviously this isnt the case.
if I have missed any necessary information etc, Im very new to all of this.
Exporting large file sizes. In short I'm trying to export some images for large format printing but am having trouble preparing the right size in LR4.
Â
Specifically I'm trying to produce w 30" x h 20" images. I understand that to do this I'll need a image that is 9000 x 6000 pixels set at 300 ppi. My problem is that when I export this, with the dimensions set to width and height in pixels and resize unchecked LR4 produces an image that is 9000 x 4887?
Â
what i'm doing wrong here? Is it simply that the aspect ratio of image is wrong to produce this size image? My concern is not producing an exact file size for printing.
Using Lightroom 4.3 on OS X 10.7.5 (Mac Pro with 24GB of RAM) I'm having problems stacking sets of images. The groups of images I'm stacking can range from 50 to 1400. No matter the size, stacking a group of images stalls and I have to quit Lightroom. At best I'll stack one group, quit, restart and move on to the next group. The stack doesn't show before quiting, but appears to be stacked on restart. If I'm lucky I can get a few sets of images stacked before things devolve into this dysfuncitonal cycle of stacking, quiting LR, opening LR, confirming stack is complete and stackin a new set of images. Is this a known bug? Any fixes to get past this? I'm working through 15000+ images to edit and organize for a project of mine. The total image total is higher, but I've stopped collecting images in LR for this project until I sort out this problem.
View 8 Replies View RelatedI have been reporting this problem in PhotoPaint for many years now, and was hoping it might be fixed with the 64 bit implementation. Â Sadly, it still does not work. Â Certainly this cannot be such an impossible problem to resolve.
The last version when it worked was with release 12, which I kept around for quite a while until I switched to a new system. Â Â I have tried it on each release of PhotoPaint since then, and it has failed on X3, X4, X5 and now it still fails in X6. Â
It works with smaller images, but when the image is greater than some 3000 to 4000 pixels wide, the results are totally scrambled.. Â