Spot removal prior to printing.

[marvpelkey]

I have a number of images which I took, through a plexiglass sheet, using a macro lens. The plexiglass is a magnet for tiny threads/hairs/bits/bobs. So, I am in the process of removing these things prior to printing a few.

Initially, I did a run through at 100% zoom, but made the mistake of reviewing one at 200% and, of course, more debris became obvious. All debris pieces are black as the plexiglass is backlit and some of these distractions are minuscule and are much narrower than the 8 px size of the tool, but some are much longer (like a hair that is about 1-3 px wide by 100 px long).

So, I began wondering if a modern day printer (commercial or otherwise) is even capable of picking up debris this small. I would imagine that a dark thread against a light background would be more obvious than against a darker surface....

For printing purposes, any recommended zoom level to ensure nothing is left visible for the printer, without going too far down a rabbit hole? I don't have a printer to test this myself.

[langier]

Create an 8x10 document and cut-and-paste sections from your final images you are concerned, both before and after spot removal. Take some of the most egregious areas along with more subtle/smaller areas, probably best to place them side-by-side, say 1x2 or 2x2 samples. Send this off to your regular printer and have them run a print for you and then you will know which spots you can ignore and which you need to spend time upon.

It the area is in a section of the image without detail, so much the better as you can create a feathered section, dupe the layer and apply dust/scratches, adjusting the sliders and then apply. This is something I learned long-ago when it came to debris or spots in the sky as usually on a clear day, sharpness and detail wasn't too much a concern.

[digitaldog]

No need to zoom past 100% and even at that ratio, depending on the pixel density, its likely some of what you see will not showup on the print.

[marvpelkey]

Thanks for the replies langler and digitaldog.

I was hoping to avoid the step of sending off sample images to a printer, and digitaldogs advice eases some of my concerns.

Thanks again.

[dgberg]

If you are doing that type of work one of these is a must have. They pick up everything. One of the best tools I own. Only problem is they are quite pricy at $375.

[aaronleitz]

How big are you printing these? Are they for sale?

I have a similar series of where I've photographed layers of cellophane. The static picks up all manner of dust, hair, etc. I also have a series with large gradients of color taken stopped way down that really show a lot of sensor dust.

I have come to terms with going down the rabbit hole as part of my process for finalizing a file for print. I methodically scan the image for spots, dust, hairs, bits, bobs at 200%. I have a curves layer in the file named "spot" where I crank on the contrast to reveal even the faintest of imperfections.

I'd rather spend a few extra hours at 200% and be confident that the file is ready to print at any size.