10D images and native resolution

[andreas_carl]

PS: The same goes for unsharp masking. There can be a benefit in incremental USM (in steps of 10%) versus single step USM. Also make sure you do the USM after up-sampling your image, otherwise you will magnify the sharpening artifacts!

[peter_smirnoff]

Jason A - what a waste of time your question was. You've received good advice including the excellent posts from Bob A. Unfortunately, you just don't get it.

[mike_morgan1]

Jason, have you read the article, every word, slowly?

 

If you have 180 ppi for a full 10D image, you will have a print of 17.067 x 11.378"

 

If you want 320 ppi for a 4x6" image, in photoshop the following works without loosing more information than necessary:

 

1. Deselect resample image check box.

2. Set your resolution to 320. This will give you a 9.6 x 6.4" image

3. Select the resample image check box.

4. In the width box, type 6 (assuming you're on inches). This will reduce the number of pixels in your image from 3072x2048 to 1920x1280.

5. Select the OK button.

6. Since you have just gone from a 3072x2048 to 1920x1280, you have resampled your image. Hopefully Photoshop performed a lowpass filter first. No matter, it is probably a good idea to apply USM.

7. Save as a different name unless you want to loose the full 3072x2048 resolution.

[steve_barnett2]

I also think that your advice from the lab Jason, regarding what the printers require in terms of ppi, is a recommendation as to the maximum they are capable of, not something fixed in stone. Like any other printers they will dump information going to print if it is more than their native spec, or use whatever you give them if less. They will not grind to a halt.

[allen_kurth]

You have the file and you have the printer. Try printing at the 180ppi and at the 320. Any difference? If so, post the results. Pick a good sharp image with lots of fine detail. You can argue all you want with posts but not with your test prints. Let us know how it turned out.