25th June 2005, 04:11 PM
JPG: Original size Vs Small size
After post processing of my raw image, I tried to convert to jpg in different size: one is original size:3456x2304, ( 3 M bytes+), another is smalll size 600x400 ( 200K bytes), and review in monitor (both are in full screen).
I thought a lot of details were lost after resizing the image, to my surprise, the image with small size is much sharper, original size image is quite soft, how come? Is it because the resolution of original size image is higher than the monitor?
If I print both images in small or big size, quality of original image should be better ?
Which image can be a reference, to determine whether sharpness is enough?
26th June 2005, 01:44 AM
if u shrink your zoom view of the original to match that of the 600x400, ur picture would look the same in terms of your "sharpness" no?
just like how pictures on the lcd may look sharp comapred to on screen, due to its size.
26th June 2005, 07:28 AM
Size the image for print. THen go to view--> print size in photoshop. Thats the most accurate way of seeing what a print will look like.