Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Downsampling for Web from High Resolution Files

  1. #1
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    98
    Threads
    23
    Thank You Posts

    Default Downsampling for Web from High Resolution Files

    Over on avian I had mentioned in a thread of mine that as Iíve been using the R5 more and more over the past year or so, Iíve grown increasingly frustrated with the sharpness of downsampled files for web. Until the R5, all the bodies Iíve used were lower resolution, high-speed bodies like the 1DX Mark II and a9 and Iím wondering if maybe the workflow I used when downsampling files from those cameras needs to be adjusted when working with the higher resolution files.

    My workflow generally has been:

    1. Make adjustments in ACR without applying any noise reduction or sharpening
    2. Open in PS, duplicate the base layer and open that layer in Denoise
    3. Convert the Denoiseíd layer to a smart object to selectively apply filters based on what Iím exporting for (print, Instagram, etc)
    4. Run two passes of Unsharp Mask set to 70 for sharpening and 1-1.2 for radius on the layer to over-sharpen and retain detail when downsampling for web
    5. Export for Web, setting quality to 76% and the dimensions as applicable for whatever my target is (1080px wide for Instagram, 1920px wide for here etc)


    This workflow has always worked very well in the past but it seems that when Iím exporting files that are barely cropped from 45MP, the amount of downsampling necessary to get to the target resolution is just too great and the files end up looking softer than downsampling from a lower resolution file. Any suggestions would be appreciated, Iím in the process of switching to Sony and picked up an a9 ii for a good price recently with the intention of just using that as my main body. Iíll be hanging on to my R5 and 600L II for a while though still because it seems like 600 GMís are virtually impossible to find at the moment and Iím too spoiled by my 600L to just use my 200-600 as my primary lens lol

  2. #2
    Super Moderator Daniel Cadieux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    25,334
    Threads
    3,866
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hey Anthony, good question. I see many great images with the R5 online, so there must be a good resizing workflow somewhere. Someone will surely chime in....and I will be interested as I still use the "lowly" 7DII with only 18MP, so whenever I upgrade to mirrorless I will surely run into some issues like this as well. I assume your web files are flattened (when using layers) and saved as jpegs.

  3. #3
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    98
    Threads
    23
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Yep, I always use the Export for Web option in PS and export the files as resized JPEGís at 76% quality (Iíve read in a few different articles that 76% is a sweet spot between file size and IQ, itís generally worked pretty well on Instagram).

  4. #4
    Super Moderator arash_hazeghi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, California, United States
    Posts
    18,179
    Threads
    1,272
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Tony
    you might consider running NR on the BG. The noise in the BG can really increase the file size. Some images made with the high res cameras such as my own A1 just cannot be compressed to 600KB so I host these externally on my own site. Noting you can do about it...
    the BPN infrastructure is a bit old and obsolete so it does not allow for modernization regarding posting size.
    New! Sony BIF Guide2021
    https://www.arihazeghiphotography.co...ny_guides.html


    ------------------------------------------------
    Visit my blog
    http://www.arihazeghiphotography.com/blog

  5. #5
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    98
    Threads
    23
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Thanks Ari, itís not the file size that Iím having trouble with itís just that the actual image quality once itís resized for web from a high resolution file seems more degraded than when I downsample from a lower resolution file. Iíve never really had an issue with file size, saving at 76% and resizing to 1920px wide almost always gets me under 500KB and if it doesnít I usually will run it through a compressor like Googleís Squoosh.

    Quote Originally Posted by arash_hazeghi View Post
    Hi Tony
    you might consider running NR on the BG. The noise in the BG can really increase the file size. Some images made with the high res cameras such as my own A1 just cannot be compressed to 600KB so I host these externally on my own site. Noting you can do about it...
    the BPN infrastructure is a bit old and obsolete so it does not allow for modernization regarding posting size.

  6. #6
    Super Moderator arash_hazeghi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, California, United States
    Posts
    18,179
    Threads
    1,272
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    76% compression is too much for an image that has lots of details. Won’t look good
    New! Sony BIF Guide2021
    https://www.arihazeghiphotography.co...ny_guides.html


    ------------------------------------------------
    Visit my blog
    http://www.arihazeghiphotography.com/blog

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics