Sizing down is ruining my lines.....

[squee]

I don't know what to call this so I couldn't even search for it. But on my shoot today my model wore a black shirt with white stripes

They look totally fine until I size them down for proofing...

The lines don't look that jagged in the full-sized version but it's happened to a lot of them. It's almost like they're too sharp. I was wondering how to fix this and if someone could explain why this happens (just for better understanding)? Also, what does the job better? Neat Image? Photoshop? Lightroom?

Thanks guys.

 

[tirediron]

Don't worry about it; it's just a result of the information lost as a result of the image being downsized.

 

[squee]

Don't worry about it; it's just a result of the information lost as a result of the image being downsized.

I'd prefer to fix it if I can because he's probably going to post some of them on FB.

 

[reznap]

Line moiré - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's called moire. It happens when photoshop resizes, badly. I'd try and resize gradually. Make the image a little smaller, run an unsharp mask filter, repeat.

There may be better methods but I'm not sure. I know, it's annoying as hell - it's happened to me as well.

 

[Negative ISO]

Most resizing programs have different options, each that provides a different approach to resizing that will produce different results. In GIMP the options are cubic, linear and sinc. In photoshop they are a little different: bicubic, bilinear, bicubic soft, etc...

Also don't forget to play around with JPG quality when you save? Lower JPG quality could cause some of this as well.

If none of this helps, maybe post a 100% crop of part of the image for us to fiddle with? Good luck!

 

[JG_Coleman]

Well... sadly, I can't think of any ways that you might remedy the problem. But, I can show you why it is happening. Take a look at this zoomed-in crop from your photograph.

The reason this is happening is that, by the time you reduce it to the size you have posted it here in the forum, the pinstripes are effectively only one-pixel wide. Thus, as the pinstripes shift with the folds of the fabric, they are being forced to just bump over to the next vertical line of pixels. The resizing algorithm handles this by making one line of the pinstripe taper off to darker tones, while the line of pixels beside it gradually brightens up. It's the best the resizing algorithm can do with such thin lines at such a low-resolution. Inevitably, it cannot produce a smooth, unbroken line at this resolution. It's quite a bind, really... I'm glad I don't do photos of people.

 

[hartz]

Everything looks pixelated in the photo you posted - look at the edges of his glasses. This appears to be the same thing as the stripes in the shirt.As others have implied, this appears to be the result of what the PP software did. Did you resize multiple times? Dit you sharpen harshly? Did you increase the size, eg after shrinking the image too much? Compressed the photo a lot?

A few bits of advice ... others may have better / more info.

Remember that every edit throws away data while attempting to create information. Data (what the sensor recorded) can be copied, moved, or deleted, but can never be created. Information (meaning of the data, conclusions, deductions) is created by processing available (at that time) data.

Never save over or lose your original.

Increasing the size of a photo is an attempt to store more information by guessing the missing data through "clever" tricks. Since data can not be created the resize is only as good as the guess-work.

Do all your editing in the highest resolution possible. Possible exception: Applying blur effects might have value when done as a last step.

Resize only once (not in steps as previously suggested).

Never try to increase size. Ever.

Do each tipe of edit only once. If you did not do enough of something, undo it and redo it with a stronger setting. Note that while an edit tool is open, it will do this for you. So if you change the parameters of the tool up and down while previewing to see the effect, the tool will keep applying the new settings to the original data (i.e original at the time when you started working with that tool)

As others have suggested, better (slower) mathematical formulas for resizing will produce better quality images.

Remember that every step, even though it improves the look of the photo overall (creates more information), reduces the quality and/or quantity of the data (what you have left to work with in subsequent steps).

FWIW: RAW files contains the most data, but the least amount of information.

 

[JG_Coleman]

Everything looks pixelated in the photo you posted - look at the edges of his glasses. This appears to be the same thing as the stripes in the shirt.As others have implied, this appears to be the result of what the PP software did. Did you resize multiple times? Dit you sharpen harshly? Did you increase the size, eg after shrinking the image too much? Compressed the photo a lot?

A few bits of advice ... others may have better / more info.

Remember that every edit throws away data while attempting to create information. Data (what the sensor recorded) can be copied, moved, or deleted, but can never be created. Information (meaning of the data, conclusions, deductions) is created by processing available (at that time) data.

Never save over or lose your original.

Increasing the size of a photo is an attempt to store more information by guessing the missing data through "clever" tricks. Since data can not be created the resize is only as good as the guess-work.

Do all your editing in the highest resolution possible. Possible exception: Applying blur effects might have value when done as a last step.

Resize only once (not in steps as previously suggested).

Never try to increase size. Ever.

Do each tipe of edit only once. If you did not do enough of something, undo it and redo it with a stronger setting. Note that while an edit tool is open, it will do this for you. So if you change the parameters of the tool up and down while previewing to see the effect, the tool will keep applying the new settings to the original data (i.e original at the time when you started working with that tool)

As others have suggested, better (slower) mathematical formulas for resizing will produce better quality images.

Remember that every step, even though it improves the look of the photo overall (creates more information), reduces the quality and/or quantity of the data (what you have left to work with in subsequent steps).

FWIW: RAW files contains the most data, but the least amount of information.

Well... although this is all good information... it really can't help him with this photograph. As I have demonstrated, at the size at which the photograph is posted here, the pinstripes are only one-pixel wide. Thus, it is impossible for them to show as one unbroken line at this resolution.

It really has nothing at all to do with his post-processing, or with his resizing algorithm, or with multiple saves, or with having less data or anything.

Again, the information provided is useful... just not for this problem. If the pinstripes, when the photograph is proportionally resized to these dimensions, are only one pixel wide... then they inevitably will not show as smooth, unbroken lines.

The only way to remedy this problem would be to avoid resizing the photograph to such small dimensions. Even if the pinstripes could be kept just two pixels wide, rather than one, then this problem wouldn't be nearly as pronounced.

My advice: if you intend to regularly resize photos so small, tell your models not to wear pinstripes... otherwise, you'll be unendingly plagued by this problem.

 

[hartz]

Again, the information provided is useful... just not for this problem. If the pinstripes, when the photograph is proportionally resized to these dimensions, are only one pixel wide... then they inevitably will not show as smooth, unbroken lines.

The only way to remedy this problem would be to avoid resizing the photograph to such small dimensions. Even if the pinstripes could be kept just two pixels wide, rather than one, then this problem wouldn't be nearly as pronounced.

My advice: if you intend to regularly resize photos so small, tell your models not to wear pinstripes... otherwise, you'll be unendingly plagued by this problem.

True and I should have mentioned that. What struck me though was the severity of the problem - I can't help but wonder whether it isn't possible to do a better resize?

 

[LCARSx32]

Would you mind posting a larger size so we can see if we can resize it any better? I've had luck in the past fixing issues like this. Mainly by resizing in increments like someone mentioned earlier (like if you want it 1/4 size, size it to 1/2 first and then 1/2 again.)

BTW: JG, I'm pretty sure the OP is a she, lol. "Abby Nugent Photography".

 

[Flash Harry]

If these are proofs and you have the original shots then tell him the story, if he wants prints they will look right, I've dozens of pin striped morning suit shots which look the same on wedding proofs as I don't give them for print purpose, they are simply a view to give the client an idea of the shot, which, is what a "proof" should be. H