Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2014 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?

  
 
sb in ak
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


I'm wondering it's better to upres files using Photoshop vs. Lightroom for printing. I have a 5D3 and am looking at printing the files as large as a 20x30 from Mpix.

Reason I ask is that PS provides more options for enlargement.

My Photoshop CC trial just ended. I have a standalone version of LR4. (Also trying to decide whether to sign up for the phtography subscription).



Dec 16, 2014 at 03:34 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


I'm going to bet that both simply do an excellent job.

If you really know what you are doing you may be able to do some trickier things in PS such as multiple types of sharpening at different stages (I typically do 3 or 4) and more precisely target different sharpening to different areas of the image. Frankly, it is rare to need to do that.

I would upgrade from LR 4, since the current is 5.7.

As an option, if you are considering upgrading LR, you can get both LR and PS together for $9.99/month from Adobe.

Dan



Dec 16, 2014 at 05:03 PM
sb in ak
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


gdanmitchell wrote:
I'm going to bet that both simply do an excellent job.

If you really know what you are doing you may be able to do some trickier things in PS such as multiple types of sharpening at different stages (I typically do 3 or 4) and more precisely target different sharpening to different areas of the image. Frankly, it is rare to need to do that.

I would upgrade from LR 4, since the current is 5.7.

As an option, if you are considering upgrading LR, you can get both LR and PS together for $9.99/month from Adobe.

Dan


Thanks for chiming in here, Dan.

My main motivation for bringing in the file to Photoshop is because I know that program does a good job with enlargements using the "best for enlargement" option (bicubic? I can't remember) Lightroom doesn't specify how it does the enlargement. So it may do a fine job. I just can't test the two next to each other right now as the trial for PS has expired. In the past, I've edited the file in LR, and exported to PS to enlarge (20x30", 300ppi), taken it back to LR, and exported to JPEG for Mpix prints (they do not accept TIFF). The PS step may be unecessary.

I haven't done any sharpening in PS. I use it in the export dialog in Lightroom and it looks good to me.

I will likely begrudgingly do the $9.99 subscription deal. I do need PS here and there for other tasks. It's not the worst deal considering you get current versions of LR and PS out of it. I imagine if I do the year deal, I'll automatically get bumped to LR6 if/when it comes out?



Dec 16, 2014 at 05:35 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


I know about those alternate up (and down) rezzing settings in Photoshop. Frankly, most often I let it pick automatically and it does quite well. Most often when I feel that I have to use the alternatives it is because I am downsizing a jpg for online presentation!

I think that a key here is that you use the export dialog in Lightroom and "it looks good" to you.

I having been a fan of the subscription model from Adobe, and in the back of my mind I still feel there are reasons for concern. Yet, I enrolled!

Dan



Dec 16, 2014 at 05:50 PM
colinm
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


Lightroom doesn't specify how it does the resampling because, like its sharpening algorithms, it's adaptive. You tell it what direction you're going and what final resolution you want and magic simply happens.

I haven't played around with PS CC14 extensively yet, but Lightroom's resampling hadn't made it into Photoshop last I heard, so Lightroom releases have tended to give slightly better results in most cases than contemporaneous releases of Photoshop. The last couple versions of Photoshop can at least select the best available algorithm automatically, but all the options are refinements of the long-standard options.

If you want to toss a file up I'd be happy to upsize it a couple ways in both applications so you can have the "head to head" example you didn't get before the trial expired. But I agree with Dan: If you're happy with what you're getting, and you like your workflow, keep on keeping on.

That being said, IMO the CC Photography Bundle's a pretty good deal. Lightroom's on roughly an annual schedule, so you'd be spending $79 anyway to stay up to date. For another $40, you always have the latest version of Photoshop. And if you've got a tablet, you get Lightroom Mobile and Photoshop Mix in that same $40.



Dec 16, 2014 at 06:21 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


Lightroom's features are often actually in ACR rather than just Photoshop. The way that lightroom works is more akin to ACR on steroids, and LR and ACR share the same software engine from what I was told by Adobe employees.

dan



Dec 17, 2014 at 12:27 AM
John Wheeler
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


Hi sb in ak
I have not seen issues with the automatic setting yet I am sure some have.

If you want more options, get the Mogrify 2 plugin for LR as it gives you 13 different resizing algorithms to choose from. Unfortunately I don't have the expertise to tell you which algorithm to use under which circumstance.

More is not necessarily better yet wanted you to be aware of that option.



Dec 17, 2014 at 01:13 AM
Alex Nail
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


In my experience you need to be printing HUUUUGE to see a difference. Printing say a 16MP image to 30" I doubt you would see much difference if any. I say do whatever is easiest


Dec 17, 2014 at 05:14 AM
chez
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


I use Lightroom for my printing and unless I print really big, 60"x40", I just let Lightroom. Do it's uprezzing and it does a wonderful job. There is no need to make it anymore complex using PS as you'll spend way more time but achieve zero results. Stick with LR.


Dec 17, 2014 at 08:23 AM
schlotz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


SB: I've done many 30x20 prints from the 5D3 utilizing LR's export to jpg @100%, resizing to 30" long edge with 300+ppi. All sent off to WHCC and each turned out perfect. To date I've found no need to utilize PS for this process although, Alex may be on to something if you are thinking REALLY BIG

Matt



Dec 17, 2014 at 08:30 AM
chez
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


schlotz wrote:
SB: I've done many 30x20 prints from the 5D3 utilizing LR's export to jpg @100%, resizing to 30" long edge with 300+ppi. All sent off to WHCC and each turned out perfect. To date I've found no need to utilize PS for this process although, Alex may be on to something if you are thinking REALLY BIG

Matt


If you go really big, there are 3rd party products which do a better job than ps. For sizes like 20x30, LR does a wonderful job and no need to look elsewhere.



Dec 17, 2014 at 09:32 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


I've been surprised in the past year or two to find that a number of folks who are quite persnickety about the quality of their large prints (here we are talking 30" x 40") are doing a lot of their post processing and quite a bit of their printing out of LR. A few of these folks are essentially "Photoshop gurus" whose photography is very well known and who teach printing workshops.

I have a personal "failing" when it comes to Lightroom — as much as I have tried (since the very first version of LR) I have been unable to let go of my Photoshop workflow. I'm certainly not saying this to encourage others to use Photoshop instead of Lightroom — in fact, for most people I strongly recommend LR. But I just find LR to be awkward for me compared to my intuitive ability to operate Photoshop at this point.

That is a preface to telling you about my surprise about how some are using LR. At one point I was talking with a friend who regularly teaches me new and novel and powerful ways to use LR and Photoshop to deal with image processing. I mentioned my LR-averse "issue" to him, and he pointed out that his main use of LR, besides to organize his images, was to print from it! That was a surprise.

What I'm seeing a lot of is photographers who know Photoshop inside-out who use LR more than Photoshop these days — they feel that they can do all of their post-processing for the vast majority of their photographs with LR alone, they feel that it provides a better image management solution... and they prefer to print from it.

They continue to use Photoshop for specialized images that present particular challenges that cannot be handled in LR or which can be handled better in Photoshop, but these constitute a smaller and smaller percentage of their work. Meanwhile, I'm stuck in Photoshop. (I have used LR extensively for one recent large project... but I still find myself using it more or less like ACR on steroids. ;-)

Dan

Edited on Dec 17, 2014 at 07:44 PM · View previous versions



Dec 17, 2014 at 11:33 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


+1 @ Dan,

LR has become much more useful from its origins as Adobe seems to keep bringing more of the PS power into it with successive iterations.

Like those who state, I can do 90% of what I need in LR, going only to PS for special purposes. I'm the reciprocal @ I can do 90% of what I need in PS, only going to LR for special purposes (i.e.large volume production culling, etc.)

Much of my work is very "one off", so I stay in PS for most things (99.9%). Like Dan, it is the workflow that I "think" in terms of. There was a time that PS was foreign to me, then the time that LR & PS were about even. Now, my thought process is distinctly PS and LR is essentially foreign.


As to the aspect of uprezzing ... when I feel that I'm going to need to uprezz a file for a large print (variably defined / in context with starting pixels, i.e. heavy crop), I uprezz the file BEFORE I process it. That might put a heavier load on the PC and slow down the editing speed a bit, but if you are talking about an image from a 14MP camera with a heavy crop ... that is quite a diff from a 36MP image with no crop being uprezzed to a given size (say 20x30 vs. something in the 60" or larger range).

I'm really not familiar with LR for input uprezzing (noting it @ available for output), but I'd be inclined to uprezz my file in PS (if LR has no option for pre-processing uprezz), then process in LR if I were LR oriented, so I'd still be doing my processing on the properly sized file, where I can see the effects first rather than leaving it to the algorithm. I guess that would essentially be "input" uprezzing vs. "output" uprezzing.

For a full frame file from the 5D3 to a 20x30 ... that's not a humongous amount of uprezzing needed, so the diff @ input / output or LR / PS might be nominal these days for most applications. You can also do some 8X10 crop test shots at diff methods to evaluate your uprezz process @ in/out & LR/PS to see how much diff it makes in your workflow.



Dec 17, 2014 at 12:51 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


For input uprezzing, ACR may be the best place to start, as you can move the imported raw file to Photoshop at higher than native resolutions if you choose.

Dan

RustyBug wrote:
+1 @ Dan,

LR has become much more useful from its origins as Adobe seems to keep bringing more of the PS power into it with successive iterations.

Like those who state, I can do 90% of what I need in LR, going only to PS for special purposes. I'm the reciprocal @ I can do 90% of what I need in PS, only going to LR for special purposes (i.e.large volume production culling, etc.)

Much of my work is very "one off", so I stay in PS for most things (99.9%). Like Dan, it is the workflow that I "think" in
...Show more



Dec 17, 2014 at 07:46 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


+1 @ ACR option vs. image size in PS.

While aware of both methods, it has been over a year since I have done any uprezzing, so I've forgotten which I used and what (if any) diffs I noted between the two methods. It's not very often that I print, less often that I print large and even less so that it is a file I need to uprezz first.

I did have an instance where I needed quite a bit of uprezz (targeting 225 ppi) and definitely found the input to yield less artifacts and better sharpening control on the back end. I had to revise my usual processing parameters along the way with some trial & error, but the effort was worth it.



Dec 17, 2014 at 11:30 PM
Alan321
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


You might consider using Genuine Fractals or whatever they call it now. Then you'll only have to do capture sharpening in Lr or Ps and let GF do whatever it takes to make a good print of any size or sizes from the one file.

That way you'll have fewer image files to manage and you won't have to make a different one for every possible print size.

- Alan



Dec 18, 2014 at 01:31 AM
EB-1
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


I used to use Q Image for large prints, then later GF/Perfect Resize, but PS is enough for a small upres.

EBH



Dec 18, 2014 at 01:58 AM
henry albert
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


I don't print above 24-26 inches and always use Photoshop. I've tried LightRoom but I see no improvement in the image quality. Plus, I've used Photoshop since the first port to PC and I know it well. As was said above, I've reluctant to give up the interface--for a long time PC user, the LR interface sucks. I'm stickiing with ACR-Photoshop-Neat Image.


Dec 18, 2014 at 09:21 AM
Jman13
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Uprezzing: LR vs PS?


Honestly, for most labs, you don't want to uprez at all. I'm not sure about Mpix (I use them for cards from time to time and I have made many prints, but not recently...I use ProDPI as my lab now), but both ProDPI and WHCC, if I recall correctly, request you don't uprez the files since they have programming and sharpening algorithms to accurately portray your image at the ordered size. Check with them first.

I don't really have this issue on my own printing since I can only go to 13x19". I do use Lightroom for printing since managing paper color profiles and size/borders, plus output sharpening are very easy in the LR print module.



Dec 18, 2014 at 09:58 AM





FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.