Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?  (Read 17165 times)

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #20 on: July 05, 2014, 06:35:13 am »

Mark and all,
As the subject has been discussed Ad nauseam it still seems to never answer all the questions.
Take this one for example. To control file size we resample all of our large files for canvas prints in CC or Perfect resize to 180 ppi.
Then uprez in Lightroom to 360 for printing. We save the the smaller 180 ppi print file to our print folder and it is ready for future printing.
A 40x60 print at 180 ppi is 221mb and at 360 ppi it is an 884mb file,the difference in file size is huge.
We have done this dozens of ways but just do not see differences that would warrant resampling  to 360 ppi and then be stuck with all those extremely large files.
Are we missing anything?

Dan, I don't think so, but perhaps worth adding - if I am not mistaken about this, that if you are printing from LR, any uprezzing you order-up in the Print Module by specifying the output PPI for printing, is done on the fly and does not change the size of the master file from what you started with. By this understanding, you eat your cake and have it.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #21 on: July 05, 2014, 07:33:01 am »

Mark and all,
As the subject has been discussed Ad nauseam it still seems to never answer all the questions.
Take this workflow for example. To control file size we resample all of our large files for canvas prints in CC or Perfect resize to 180 ppi.

Hi Dan,

Why 180 PPI? Do you only have a single input pixel size that, at 180 PPI, produces the correct output dimensions (in inches)?

Also, do you optimize sharpening for this resampled resolution? If you always resample up then that may be not the best practice, because any artifacts created by resampling to 180PP and sharpening at that size will be magnified when you then upsample again. It seems that it may be better to do a single upsample to outputsize, regardless of the original file size in pixels. It will even reduce your storage requirements for these intermediates, and save time.

Quote
Then uprez in Lightroom to 360 for printing. We save the the smaller 180 ppi print file to our print folder and it is ready for future uprezzing/printing.

I stiil have difficulty in seeing the benefit of the intermediate resizing. By stopping mid-way, you do not use the full potential of Perfect Resize. LR is also full well capable of upsampling from native/original pixel dimensions to final pixel dimensions, in a single go, but PR will do it even better in a single operation.

Quote
A 40x60 print at 180 ppi is 221mb the same file resampled in CC to 360 ppi is a 884mb file,the difference in file size is huge.

Is this by any chance a compromise to still allow printing from LR without choking it with very large input files? That would make some sense, but at the expense of potential output quality.

Quote
We have done this dozens of ways but just do not see differences that would warrant resampling  to 360 pip in CC or PR and then be stuck with all those extremely large files.

Why save the resampled file? All you need is a good quality upsampling solution that can be used on-demand, which then also allows to add an amount of output sharpening (from a preset if simplification of the output sharpening process is that important). That is exactly what Topaz Labs Detail allows to do, because it does not target fixed pixel detail dimensions, but rather a 'class' of detail and therefore independent of original pixel dimensions but rather actual detail at the actual output image dimensions.

Cheers,
Bart
« Last Edit: July 05, 2014, 07:36:54 am by BartvanderWolf »
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #22 on: July 05, 2014, 11:15:36 am »

We have done this dozens of ways but just do not see differences that would warrant resampling  to 360 pip in CC or PR and then be stuck with all those extremely large files.
Missing anything?
Not as far as I'm concerned as I've seen the same results. YMMV of course and the image data, printer and so forth must also play a role. Some of us don't see any differences outside of viewing the image with a loupe, other's report they do see differences with their naked eyes (and I assume at viewing distance). Bottom line, test this for yourself, adapt your workflow accordingly.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

dgberg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2753
    • http://bergsprintstudio.com http://bergscustomfurniture.com
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #23 on: July 05, 2014, 12:34:54 pm »

Hi Dan,

Why 180 PPI? Do you only have a single input pixel size that, at 180 PPI, produces the correct output dimensions (in inches)?

Also, do you optimize sharpening for this resampled resolution? If you always resample up then that may be not the best practice, because any artifacts created by resampling to 180PP and sharpening at that size will be magnified when you then upsample again. It seems that it may be better to do a single upsample to outputsize, regardless of the original file size in pixels. It will even reduce your storage requirements for these intermediates, and save time.

I stiil have difficulty in seeing the benefit of the intermediate resizing. By stopping mid-way, you do not use the full potential of Perfect Resize. LR is also full well capable of upsampling from native/original pixel dimensions to final pixel dimensions, in a single go, but PR will do it even better in a single operation.

Is this by any chance a compromise to still allow printing from LR without choking it with very large input files? That would make some sense, but at the expense of potential output quality.

Why save the resampled file? All you need is a good quality upsampling solution that can be used on-demand, which then also allows to add an amount of output sharpening (from a preset if simplification of the output sharpening process is that important). That is exactly what Topaz Labs Detail allows to do, because it does not target fixed pixel detail dimensions, but rather a 'class' of detail and therefore independent of original pixel dimensions but rather actual detail at the actual output image dimensions.

Cheers,
Bart

A fair amount of my larger canvas prints are reprints of same size work for artisans so saving the file like I do equates to just hitting the print one button.
In the past I almost always resampled to 180 ppi in PR or CC and printed from Lightroom with no further uprezz with excellent results.
 I have seen more issues on these very large prints when resampling straight to 360 ppi in CC or PR when the resample was 400% and larger.
A 180 ppi resample usually kept me in the 200% range. Then send the file to Lightroom for printing and let it handle the 360 uprez. Smaller file,much quicker spool and at least for us the same results or better as doing it straight to 360.
Which begs the question I guess I started with. For anyone else does a file resampled straight to 360 in PR or CC with no further uprezz in Lightroom print any differently then a resampled file to 180 in PR or CC and then uprezzed to 360 in Lightroom for the final print?
For me no different and I have several bonuses as noted.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2014, 12:38:18 pm by Dan Berg »
Logged

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4066
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #24 on: July 05, 2014, 04:14:58 pm »

Hello Dan

My process for about the last year is to output a raw conversion to 300dpi. Canon Nikon Phase or Fuji. Then when I print go to LR and use it to get to the final output size at 360 ppi.

I agree this does make for some big files easily approaching 1GB in 16 bit especially with multi-image stitched panoramas.

Paul
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com

mjcreedon

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #25 on: July 05, 2014, 11:55:18 pm »

Using Raw Developer from Iridient has the best upsample output to 200%-250% at 240 PPI from your Canon Raw files.  Use RL Deconvolution sharpen at 50% of the default setting and save out as 16 bit Tiff.
Michael Creedon
Logged

uaiomex

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1211
    • http://www.eduardocervantes.com
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #26 on: July 10, 2014, 10:35:19 pm »

Thanks everybody. I upsized in PS, bicubic smoother, one time. And "refocused" with Focus Magic. The prints look good if not great to me. I decided for this after reading your responses and for the inexpensive cost of FM.
Eduardo
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #27 on: July 10, 2014, 10:40:00 pm »

Thanks everybody. I upsized in PS, bicubic smoother, one time. And "refocused" with Focus Magic. The prints look good if not great to me. I decided for this after reading your responses and for the inexpensive cost of FM.
Eduardo


With all the time, effort and repeated cost of ink and paper you put into your printing, don't you think it's a bit dumb to worry about saving a few bucks on the sharpening software? I decided long ago, based on the numbers, that software is the LEAST expensive component of the whole digital image processing chain and any additional cost of software that really makes an observable difference in print quality is well worth it. That money disappears in the decimal places, but gives you a better chance for prints to look "great", not just "good".
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4066
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #28 on: July 10, 2014, 11:43:09 pm »

Actually, Focus Magic, as a purchase is not "dumb", it's an excellent tool.  The Topaz Solution (I believe theirs is called In Focus) has more adjustments, but to the results are the same. 

I use Focus Magic, in my workflow before I print from LR, depending on the image.  I have started using less Capture Sharpening in both C1 and LR and use FM now or Topaz.  Then still use the output sharpening in LR. 

Deconvolution Sharpening is pretty powerful from what I have seen, and this is used by both FM and Topaz. 

Bart's articles and posts steered me towards Focus Magic, and it's well worth the investment.

Paul
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #29 on: July 11, 2014, 12:29:04 am »

I wasn't referring so much to the product as to the idea of using it because it's cheaper. IF it's better AND cheaper, that's a win-win. But is it really? The testing I've done with deconvolution sharpening is that unless it is used VERY carefully, it produces much less satisfactory output than I get with PK2/LR.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #30 on: July 11, 2014, 04:37:16 am »

I wasn't referring so much to the product as to the idea of using it because it's cheaper. IF it's better AND cheaper, that's a win-win. But is it really? The testing I've done with deconvolution sharpening is that unless it is used VERY carefully, it produces much less satisfactory output than I get with PK2/LR.

Hi Mark,

I suggest you give FocusMagic a try, if you haven't already.

I have no commercial involvement with them, I'm just a someone who bought it after trying out lots of different sharpening methods and products, and reading on-line reviews/comparisons with images examples. But they use a pretty simple to use interface, not much one can do wrong there, it's what's going on under the hood that sets it apart from other offerings. That doesn't mean it always produces the best results, but the differences with much more involved alternatives is very small in the majority of cases in general photography.

A simple trick to avoid using the 'wrong' parameters with FocusMagic is the following.
  • Set the amount control to its maximum, 300%.
  • Start with the 'Blur width' setting at zero
  • Now gradually increase the Blur width size by 1 at a time, while watching the small preview window
  • there is usually a setting where, all of a sudden, the preview will start showing fatter contours/edges instead of sharper ones
  • at that point just go back one Blur width value
  • then reset the Amount control to a more 'reasonable' value, which depends on the image use, usually larger radii (such as after upsampling) can tolerate higher settings of 150+, smaller radii do best at 100 or less

One can play with various types of image source settings, but the default "Digital Camera" one is usually fine.

Deconvolution, a mathematical concept, is the most common way of actually restoring resolution, many other methods only adjust edge contrast which suggests higher resolution. There is no reason why the two cannot be used together for even higher (real and suggested) resolution.

That's why I also recommend having a look at 'Topaz Labs Detail'. It offers an amazing amount of control for the rendering of detail, which is not the same as resolution. Detail has to do with material surface structure and spatial dimensions. That is also very useful to improve the image quality for different viewing distances. 'Detail' offers a very creative way of interaction with the image, due to the real-time updates of the preview. The adjustments are not pixel dimension related but relative image size related, small medium and large detail, and produces no halos, so they should work well at various output sizes.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #31 on: July 11, 2014, 04:41:23 am »

Just reading all of this tells me I should stay with LR sharpening. It's super easy and the results are superb.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #32 on: July 11, 2014, 05:12:32 am »

Just reading all of this tells me I should stay with LR sharpening. It's super easy and the results are superb.

No Mark,

Good enough  is not the same as superb!

Besides, out of camera JPEGs are easy, good enough for most. ;)

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #33 on: July 11, 2014, 05:23:45 am »

No Mark,

Good enough  is not the same as superb!

Besides, out of camera JPEGs are easy, good enough for most. ;)

Cheers,
Bart

You didn't hear me being satisfied with "good enough" :-)

OK, for clarity, let's get down to the "objective function": it's partly subjective: I aim for a natural looking sharpness - not exaggerated sharpness; I don't want the sharpening to look like sharpening, or sharpening for its own sake. I don't want to see any more real or especially pseudo detail in most of my photographs than I see "in the real world" for comparable distance viewing, unless I were to have a special purpose that requires a different kind of treatment. Do you ever make a point of consciously looking at scenes or objects "x", "y" or "z" meters away specifically for the amount of textural and edge detail you can perceive at those distances? I do this periodically as a "reality check" on the kind of sharpening I do; then when I look at a photo I've printed, if it doesn't trigger me to think about whether it's "sharp enough" I'm done. 99.5% of the time LR does this for me. (The other 0.5% is probably operator error or poor focusing of the camera!)
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #34 on: July 11, 2014, 07:30:49 am »

You didn't hear me being satisfied with "good enough" :-)

OK, for clarity, let's get down to the "objective function": it's partly subjective: I aim for a natural looking sharpness - not exaggerated sharpness; I don't want the sharpening to look like sharpening, or sharpening for its own sake. I don't want to see any more real or especially pseudo detail in most of my photographs than I see "in the real world" for comparable distance viewing, unless I were to have a special purpose that requires a different kind of treatment.

Hi Mark,

That's actually a pretty decent description of what Deconvolution (e.g. FocusMagic) attempts to achieve. Restore what got lost in the earlier process, but not exaggerate. It's what saved the first images from the Hubble Space Telescope from a design error.

Quote
Do you ever make a point of consciously looking at scenes or objects "x", "y" or "z" meters away specifically for the amount of textural and edge detail you can perceive at those distances?

Yes, that's the great thing about e.g. Topaz Detail. That's why I mention it, because it is not only good for Creative 'sharpening', but also for output sharpening where we want to pre-compensate for losses that have yet to occur due to the output process (e.g. ink diffusion), and maybe something additional if the viewing distance is not too variable.

Viewing distance can alter our impression of detail quite a bit, as nicely demonstrated in this example. That's why I recommend using tools that bring such improvements within the reach of us mortals, albeit a bit more subtle, we wouldn't want to freak out people at specific viewing conditions. ;)

Quote
I do this periodically as a "reality check" on the kind of sharpening I do; then when I look at a photo I've printed, if it doesn't trigger me to think about whether it's "sharp enough" I'm done. 99.5% of the time LR does this for me. (The other 0.5% is probably operator error or poor focusing of the camera!)

Lightroom, as nice and powerful as it is, does not allow the kind of extreme control that a more involved workflow can offer. As such it will not be able to exceed the potential of that more involved approach. It may come close (enough) for some scenarios, people can try for themselves (after being handed some guidance!) as to what fits their requirements best. Thank goodness we are allowed to make our own choices, but it would be nice if its an informed choice.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4066
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #35 on: July 11, 2014, 07:35:32 am »

Everyone has their own style of printing for sure.  I agree finding a balance between "reality sharpness" and "digital sharpness" can be hard to do especially if you print the files.

I tend to flow more to the more detailed shot, it may be considered less natural I agree but it's a style that I prefer and it works for me.  

This is why I found that less Capture Sharpening during the raw conversion and adding a bit of deconvolution sharpening works better, especially on larger prints, 20 x 30 and up.  

It's hard to say just how sharp the real world is, all depends on your eyesight I guess.  Mine is less than perfect for sure!


Paul
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #36 on: July 11, 2014, 07:52:10 am »

Hi Mark,


Viewing distance can alter our impression of detail quite a bit, as nicely demonstrated in this example. That's why I recommend using tools that bring such improvements within the reach of us mortals, albeit a bit more subtle, we wouldn't want to freak out people at specific viewing conditions. ;)

Lightroom, as nice and powerful as it is, does not allow the kind of extreme control that a more involved workflow can offer. As such it will not be able to exceed the potential of that more involved approach. It may come close (enough) for some scenarios, people can try for themselves (after being handed some guidance!) as to what fits their requirements best. Thank goodness we are allowed to make our own choices, but it would be nice if its an informed choice.

Cheers,
Bart

Bart,

That example is priceless. Thanks.

As for the worth of various approaches, the LR sharpening workflow is an adaptation (by the same people) of the Sharpening Workflow originally developed by Bruce Fraser and his associates. In PK2 it is a 3 stage process, in LR 2 stage. The output sharpening in LR is an automated process - once the application knows the output resolution and the sharpening is active, the strength and character of the sharpening is done automatically on the fly; likewise in PK, there isn't scope for creativity with output sharpening - it is formula-wise resolution, size and paper dependent. Capture Sharpening is where most of the control occurs in LR, and between the four controls offered there including masking, I find it meets the overwhelming bulk of my sharpening needs very well. It is also very easy to master and occurs right within the raw workflow pipeline so no need to convert the image into a much larger PSD, yet another file with layers etc. By the time Adobe got to the degree of proficiency of LR4, I was satisfied that I could go from camera to print without leaving LR for almost all my editing and printing. Whenever I leave LR and go to PS, it's mainly for some masking or skew correction that LR is still not as good for. Otherwise the quality and convenience of a total LR workflow including sharpening, once you really know the application, is brilliant. So I think part of the choice of a sharpening solution also depends on one's overall approach to the editing workflow.

Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #37 on: July 11, 2014, 11:23:24 am »

That example is priceless. Thanks.

You're welcome Mark. I knew you could appreciate it.

Quote
As for the worth of various approaches, the LR sharpening workflow is an adaptation (by the same people) of the Sharpening Workflow originally developed by Bruce Fraser and his associates. In PK2 it is a 3 stage process, in LR 2 stage. The output sharpening in LR is an automated process - once the application knows the output resolution and the sharpening is active, the strength and character of the sharpening is done automatically on the fly; likewise in PK, there isn't scope for creativity with output sharpening - it is formula-wise resolution, size and paper dependent. Capture Sharpening is where most of the control occurs in LR, and between the four controls offered there including masking, I find it meets the overwhelming bulk of my sharpening needs very well.

I agree that it probably is good enough for most people, and it is not really that bad either. I never said such a thing. But there are even better solutions available, especially for those who need to do exceptional things, like (2.5 - 3 metre high) wall display sizes in trade-show booths. The same tools can be used for more modest challenges, at optimum quality without compromises (even at nose length viewing distances by photographers).

Quote
It is also very easy to master and occurs right within the raw workflow pipeline so no need to convert the image into a much larger PSD, yet another file with layers etc. By the time Adobe got to the degree of proficiency of LR4, I was satisfied that I could go from camera to print without leaving LR for almost all my editing and printing. Whenever I leave LR and go to PS, it's mainly for some masking or skew correction that LR is still not as good for. Otherwise the quality and convenience of a total LR workflow including sharpening, once you really know the application, is brilliant. So I think part of the choice of a sharpening solution also depends on one's overall approach to the editing workflow.

Fully agree, as long as people don't say its quality is as good as or even better than some of the more involved workflow alternatives that are discussed, e.g. here. Close is close, but only better is better.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

uaiomex

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1211
    • http://www.eduardocervantes.com
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #38 on: July 11, 2014, 01:43:01 pm »

Hi Paul:
I rarely print these days as I've been on a sabbatical for 3 years. As I said, some of the images were mainly from "old" 5D files and some from an Epson 4870. (It is amazing what these scanners can do with 120 chromes!)
I actually used a printing service for this job in lieu of using my Epson 7880. In the end, only 10 pictures were ordered. I didn't have any matte paper, only a roll of 24" Epson Luster. This job screamed for matte paper. Some were bigger than than 24" wide. So I decided to send them to a print service which I trust as if it was me pushing the Print button.

This job was (as usual) for "yesterday". I had to take a quick decision and according to most responses to my question, it seemed to me that getting Focus Magic was the way to go. After looking at my clients face, I have no doubt Focus Magic was a really smart decision. They are not in the art or graphic biz but they are very wealthy people surrounded always by art and beautiful things. They own a few boutique hotels.

However, in time I'll investigate some more on the suggestions proposed here.
Thanks guys!
Best
Eduardo

With all the time, effort and repeated cost of ink and paper you put into your printing, don't you think it's a bit dumb to worry about saving a few bucks on the sharpening software? I decided long ago, based on the numbers, that software is the LEAST expensive component of the whole digital image processing chain and any additional cost of software that really makes an observable difference in print quality is well worth it. That money disappears in the decimal places, but gives you a better chance for prints to look "great", not just "good".
« Last Edit: July 11, 2014, 01:52:03 pm by uaiomex »
Logged

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4066
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Today's best app for upsizing/sharpening for prints?
« Reply #39 on: July 13, 2014, 09:07:26 am »

Eduardo.

Glad it worked out for you.  I followed Bart's info on Focus magic, both his posts and articles and tried it.  I don't use it as much for capture sharpening, but I have found that by backing down my capture sharpening in LR or C1, then adding the FM step, I get better results.  This combined with the Topaz Clarity tool have really made for changes in my workflow.  (another of Bart's suggestions).

I still use LR for all printing at 360ppi and just let LR do the final upgrez/sharpening steps or downrez depending on the file and print. 

Paul
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up