BSPhotog Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
nolaguy wrote:
So Ben, regardless of crop, etc, you're exporting "for print" images at 6000 pixels (at what PPI?) and you're getting good results?
A lot of times these are sort of trick questions on the boards... this one isn't. I'd really like to hear how this is working for you as I haven't done near enough testing of the process.
Thanks in advance. I'd appreciate your insights and those of any others who care to comment.
C
Yeah, no problem. All things are relative, I suppose. For starters, I have nothing specified in my contract about specific resolution. I think the term that I use is "high resolution," so yeah nice and vague. Also in my contract, I don't guarantee any kind of archive service where I keep their images after delivery. If I am managing "better" versions of the images that I deliver, then that kinda sends me down a road I'm not sure I want to go down.
I'm exporting 6000px wide at 240ppi, light sharpening for print (matte paper). I sat down to grab a few images and prove my point, but quickly realized that I've been wasting my time with 6000px. I tried a few images, exported from LR at 6000px (uncropped, so this being their native resolution) and then exported at 3500px wide as well. I pulled both into PS, upscaled the 3500 images and then layered them. After flipping between the images at 200%, the difference is more than underwhelming. I took it a set further. I heavily cropped a 6000x4000 photo to 2768x1845 (arbitrary heavy crop) and did the same, exporting one at 6000px from LR with the same settings and exporting an other at the native cropped resolution (2768px). I scaled the smaller file up to 6000 and stacked them just as I had before. Again, the difference was pointless. The funny thing was that some skin tones actually looked better when output at a lower resolution. It eliminated some of the texture in a way that was not unflattering.
My only thought is that when I started doing this, it was several years back and the software was maybe less capable. I don't know, but it would appear that I've been wasting my time and disk space. I'm happy to admit being wrong here because, well, I am.
I started this thread half-wondering if it really mattered to clients and thinking about what people did when shooting cameras with vastly different resolution. I was wondering about how much of the file was being delivered from a d8x0, 5DSR, or Sony a7r-whatever. Hmm, I'm not totally sure what to think now, but I may change how I output my images from the wedding I have this weekend.
|