gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

I’m editing some RAW photos in Elements and had to do a bunch of tilt edits and of course the size reduced from its original. I see that I can resize them back to their original 6000x4000 by including the Resample option. Will that affect their quality for prints?

Paul Diamond Loc: Atlanta, GA, USA

Look at your pictures at maximum (1:1) resolution and decide if this resolution appears to continue to be "sharp" or "not". If not, please think about the implied "why". Why show your image at less than the "best" resolution that your camera/lens can produce. - PLEASE.

Next, consider recropping your image to a smaller "size" that keeps at least "most" of your resolution (what you saw or what you think you saw when shooting the picture) as the image you show to UHH members.

This is important! Why show less than your best???

You may be using a lower resolution sensor camera or a "legacy" lower resolution lens for your pictures. Rather than looking at the actual cards you are dealt in this "hand", why not show the best quality image that you are capable of showing???

Just my suggestion. - But, please look at both before deciding what you will show to the UHH community.

I think you will be happier with the best you can show to others, even if it is a smaller size 'final image.' If you "upsize" to 6Kx4K, will the 'resample' affect the quality of the images??? Try it both ways. You decide. - I believe you will choose the smaller, higher resolution image of the original.

Try both or variants and 'you decide'. (Personally, I'm disappointed by large size but low resolution or "over sharpened" variants of the original image. - Why bother???)

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

The better resize is apparently Topaz Gigapixel, but for the money, I have Photozoom which is very affordable if you buy the previous edition... $20

Photozoom 7 is available from Ashampoo for $20 version 8 is expensive from BenVista for $80 or a free trial.
https://www.ashampoo.com/en/usd/pin/partner0109/partner-software/photozoom-7?utm_source=adwords&utm_medium=sem&utm_campaign=sem_adwords&x-source=adw&x-mid=adwords

One discussion of resizing is here:
http://www.ronmartblog.com/2020/05/comparison-topaz-gigapixel-ai-vs-on1.html

Photozoom vs On1 resize
https://www.saashub.com/compare-photozoom-pro-vs-on1-resize" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.saashub.com/compare-photozoom-pro-vs-on1-resizehttps://www.saashub.com/compare-photozoom-pro-vs-on1-resize

There are many resize programs on the market. Do not rely on PS the swiss army knife of photo editing to be the best of all things.:
https://shotkit.com/how-to-resize-image/

CO

He lost resolution because he had to use the tilt feature of his software. After tilting the image you have to crop back to a rectangular format. You inevitably loose the portions of the original image outside the new crop.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

You probably don't have to up-rez at all for prints as long as you have enough pixels in your image for the desired print size and viewing distance.

http://www.photokaboom.com/photography/learn/printing/resolution/1_which_resolution_print_size_viewing_distance.htm

for a 16x20 viewed at about 3 ft (normal viewing distance for a print that size), you only need 95 ppi (1520x1900) for it to be perceived as sharp and nicely detailed. No need to resize if you are printing commercially, since most print labs use a RIP (raster image processor) - software or a combination of software and hardware - to optimize the image for printing, including resolution, antialiasing, noise etc.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Yes, it may - depending on your personal image quality tolerance - of which viewing distance is a major component.

IMO, any perceived pixel enlargement degradation using the default "Bicubic Smoother" of Elements can be mitigated by only increasing the the pixel count by 10% at a time and building to your final size. I prefer to stay on the conservative side and cap this enlargement to 50% if possible.......experimentation should define your personal tolerance tho ....
While many think there are better software (more costly) alternatives to Bicubic smoother - Bicubic still works very well .... !
.

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

Thanks. I think I’m ok then. There isn’t much tilt and I’m only losing a little. Photos at 6000 x 4000 at 300ppi end up around 5700 x 3600 at 300ppi. I will post them on Drop Box and those who went to the reunion can download or print, probably 4x6's or 5x7's, maybe an 8x10. Or just view them on a screen.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

In August 2021, I just assume people will view digital images, not print. Consider if you should further resize downward to share these images in the most helpful format to friends, using ideas in this post: Recommended resizing parameters for digital images