Downsampling images?

[Cliff_Spicer]

I know that there are actions that are available that upsample images and these sometimes do this in incremental stages to improve quality. Are such actions available for downsampling images for he web? I am not sure if there is a better method than what I currently use and that is simply to resize my images in PS using Bicubic Sharper and if the image appears too soft I do a little sharpening with smart sharpening. However, I find I loose a lot of highlight detail downsampling and the images increase in contrast which I would prefer not to happen. Does anyone have any secrets they would be willing to share on how to prepare images for the web? When I look at samples on sites like Bill Atkinson ( Bill's Page /) I am blown away by the fidelity and tonality of the images and even though I shoot much different work my original full size images are leaps and bounds better than the downsampled images I use on my site but I don’t get that feeling when I see Bill’s work online. Any ideas or suggestions?

Cliff

[Herman_Teeuwen]

Chris Cox (Adobe engineer) wrote the following on the Adobe forums:

"In CS and CS2, you shouldn't need to do downsampling in steps.
(we should have the full prefiltering done, and downsampling in steps will lead to artifacts)"

Herman

[Lonna_Tucker]

I use Bilinear instead of Bicubic Sharper for downsizing large scans of my work for web presentation, and I know that it differs from what Adobe and Adobe advocates recommend, but my results are better this way.

I start with a sharpened file:

Amount: 200%
Radius: .3
Threshold: 0

If my scan is under 100mb, then I resize in one step down using Bilinear for interpolation to web size. If its over 100mb then I will try a second image with 2 step method and compare the results.

Next is a second round of sharpening:

Amount: 200%
Radius: .2
Threshold: 0

The results are usually very nice, however I believe each photograph is image dependent so I tweak the sharpening if necessary.

I have written an action with stops and I evaluate each step of the action along the way.

Lonna Tucker
www.lonnatucker.com

[Cliff_Spicer]

Lonna,

You have spectacular looking images on your site. Man I want to go golfing after looking at your site. From looking at your work online you have it worked out and I will try your method. Do you think this method will work equally as well for images captured digitally as it does for your very large scans? The files I am working with are under 50meg. so I am not sure if that makes a difference.

Thanks again,

Cliff

[PJ_Heller]

Here's another downsampling technique for scans:

http://www.controlledvocabulary.com/...nsampling.html

[Cliff_Spicer]

Thanks PJ for the link. I saw this some time ago but I think it is really old as they reference PS 5 so I am not sure if there is a better method using CS2.

Thanks again,

Cliff

[ QUOTE ]
I use Bilinear instead of Bicubic Sharper for downsizing large scans of my work for web presentation, and I know that it differs from what Adobe and Adobe advocates recommend, but my results are better this way.

I start with a sharpened file:

Amount: 200%
Radius: .3
Threshold: 0

If my scan is under 100mb, then I resize in one step down using Bilinear for interpolation to web size. If its over 100mb then I will try a second image with 2 step method and compare the results.

Next is a second round of sharpening:

Amount: 200%
Radius: .2
Threshold: 0

The results are usually very nice, however I believe each photograph is image dependent so I tweak the sharpening if necessary.

I have written an action with stops and I evaluate each step of the action along the way.

Lonna Tucker
www.lonnatucker.com

[/ QUOTE ]

Lonna,

Wow, your shots have aquality I don't often see.

Could you go over your dynamic range adjustment processes? Great, great shots. There's just something about the tonal quality of your stuff that floors me!

Phil
http://philhawkinsphoto.com