Hi Paul, >> Go into 'IMAGE' and in the dpi box, enter something like 300 (dpi). >> Select a relevant physical size, say 8 inches by 11 or whatever, and >> Photoshop will resize the image for you to a decent physical size, and >> decent file size ready for printing. > >Okay so if i enter then image size for a 5x7 then i get 497.6pixels and >theni should be able to print at 100%
If you are scanning at 2400ppi (wrongly called dpi but accepted widely) and that is the optical resolution of the scanner, then you will end up with a scan measuring about 24mmX36mm at 2400 ppi, and the file size would be about 20 MB or so (assuming you're scanning the whole negative). Resizing the image to, say, 7X5 inches, without altering the 2400 ppi would result in a file size of over 500MB!! So, enter a new value in the print size area, ostensibly of about 300 ppi, and you'll get a much more reasonable file size - and the print will be fine. No point in making your print size any more than about 300 ppi because the printer will not make any use of the information. (Some argue 360 ppi on Epsons but I've compared 2 prints side by side, one at 300 and one at 360 and saw no difference...) As for interpolation, Photoshop does it very well indeed. So, if you want to print at A3 size (say about 16"X11") then enter those values in the print size area in the image size dialogue, and keep the resolution at 300. The file size will grow a lot, but when the image is printed out, you will be amazed at the result. Obviously there are tricks and methods to getting the best out of this process, and that's where careful study of Photoshop through books and articles comes in to play. > >> While you're at it, find >> IMAGE/LEVELS and hit the AUTO button and then enter. That'll smarten it >> up a bit for you. *Now* try printing. > >I can never get Auto Levels to do what i want, i find i get better results >when i set them manually. I would suggest you do this: make or copy a color pattern (I used blocks of color) on a plain background, and print it out. See how far out the printed colors are to the screen colors - they'll probably be so far out, you'll faint! This is where a color management regime is necessary in order to provide accurate results. My point is, have you set your monitor up properly? How do you know that what you are tweaking manually is objectively represented on the screen? If Auto Levels is giving you spurious results, i would suggest your monitor needs setting up using available software. I find Auto Levels works very well indeed. Processing and printing digital images is VERY easy to do. Processing and printing digital images WELL, is much more difficult. That's why when you go to the bookshop there are endless tomes on Photoshop. I have been at it for three years now, and I'm *still* reading and re-reading on the subject. But that's because I want my prints to be as good as I can get them using the bits that I can afford. I'm rambling a bit because it's late here, and I've still got to make some paneer (guests tomorrow night for an Indian meal...) so excuse any disjointed thoughts. HTH Cotty _______________________________________________________ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads http://www.macads.co.uk - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
