Hi Jody. I have plenty of courses that aren't for beginners. Just head to mattk.com/course-list My landscape course, luminosity mask, printing, no light no problem, texture blending, are among a few of the ones that are not geared for beginners. Thanks!
Thanks Matt for your no nonsense practical advice. I am totally comfortable with PS and LR, and too old to go trying new programs and plug ins just for the sake of it.
Great that you show folks that buying a lot of plug ins that do what Photoshop can do and just as well as the plug ins. So much marking hype in this world
Compared your suggestion to Topaz Megapixel software and Topaz was the winner hands down. Wish I could post the files here. The clarity and sharpness blew away Lightroom.
Matt, I just found you. I love your teaching method. I have a friend who needs to jump into editing but he doesn't want the extra BS of other programs. I'm sending him your way.
Use Lightroom is all a photographer needs. Ps is bloated with non photog stuff. You will be overwhelmed and give up if you start with Ps. Start with Lightroom.. itc was made by and for photogs. Trust me. Lightroom can do so so much these days is not even funny
Thoreau once quipped that he could never understand where the term "Common Sense" came from, "For it is anything but common." Happily common sense is commonly found in videos done by Matt, this being one of them! Thanks Matt!
Thanks Matt! I haven't printed an enlargement before, but have a few now that I want to. I am sure that using this process will save me grief on the other side from doing what I was going to do, which was just submitting a photo and hoping it turned out alright and then wondering what to do when it didn't. It's going to be my first 16x20, so here's hoping!
As always, thanks for explaining this in detail Matt. I avoid enlarging whenever possible (as we all do) but when absolutely necessary, I find it worth trying something I used to do in Photoshop before the 2.0 option became available. Say you wanted to increase the dimensions of a 2000x2000 px image up to 4000x4000 px. First I use the 'best' enlargement algorithm (now 2.0) and increase the size to 8000x8000 px. Then use the 'best' reduction algorithm to bring this down to the required 4000x4000 size. It can be hit and miss - it often tends to achieve a decent result around edges, but can introduce artefacts in less well-defined areas. As I say, I often try this 'over-enlarge + reduction' method and compare against the 'straight' enlargement and am occasionally pleased with the results.
Good to know that LR uses an upsampling algorithm that is so similar to PS. I love the printer/lab I send my work to, but they give me conflicting answers as to whether I should do the upsampling or if they do it for me.
Would have been interesting to see the 'raw' version of the image without using these tools to see the comparison when you did the overlay. This will be a great option going forward (versus purchasing other software I would very rarely need). Thanks!
Very interesting...you challenged me to experiment using Lightroom, Photoshop and Gigapixel on a picture of a flower. The Raw file came from my Sony A7RII and was 7952x5304 out of camera Using the same image I upsized it to 10,000 pixels using the methods you described and as a comparison used Gigapixel. One thing you did not talk about was output quality or noise reduction or output sharpening which can in my opinion one of the issues when upsizing. You commented about using the resample but not specifically about noise or sharpening a key issue when upsizing. In fact I think I saw that you left noise reduction at 0% in Photoshop. Lightroom has an adjustment for output sharpen during the upsizing but I found in the past that in many cases it over sharpened the images even when I was not upsizing the output so I usually turn it off but for the purposes of my experiment I turned it on and set the level to standard. In Photoshop I set the image size to 10,000 and made sure resample was set the way you suggested and even though you did not talk about noise reduction I set that at 50%. Next I used Gigapixel which you may know has several additional sliders dealing with suppressing noise, removing blur and a click on/off for reduce color bleed. For purposes of my experiment I set suppress noise to 50% and remove blur to 50% after thinking the Photoshop method may do both but no way to know. I did not click on reduce color bleed and used the Standard for photo type. After pixel peeping all three, Lightroom was the worst mostly because it did not do well with the additional noise during the upsize. Gigapixel and Photoshop were much better in dealing with the noise and sharpening and in my opinion Photoshop did ever so slightly better but not enough to call it a winner...it is built in and it works. However Gigapixel has setting for the subject of the photo or mode in addition to sliders for noise and blur and as I mentioned color bleed and face refinement which means in my opinion I will lean toward Gigapixel all things considered. I appreciate that resizing in Lightroom and Photoshop is built in but some of us like what the other tools offer and sometimes it is worth looking at the additional capabilities of the other tools.
Hi Andy. I honestly don't mess with any of those settings when upsizing. I've shot with large megapixel cameras since the D800 first came out so very seldom do I have to even upsize. What I've personally found is that while you will definitely see differences in Adobe as well as plug-ins, the differences are not real world. Pixel peeping is different. First, nobody will ever see the before/after or comparisons or the pixel peeped version. They'll only see what I decide to print. And in my tests over time, what I've found is that I can put all different versions up on the wall and at a normal viewing distance for say, a 17x22, and I can't tell. Were there differences when I pixel peeped on the computer? Yep. But not in my prints when viewed by real eyes at a realistic distance. For that reason, it's not worth it (in my workflow personally, and for most of those people that just print for fun and not work) to add yet another program in to the mix. I always judge based on how it looks on the wall and resizing the way I showed here works well for all of my prints when I need it. Thanks!
This is an awesome description of what can be done in resizing. For my level, it sounds like LR and PS is going to get me where I want to be, but if I was printing something big for a show, I might want to invest in the plug-in for select images. Thank you for taking the time to write it all out.
I'll watch a video & almost always to the end no matter what because, if I get even only 1 tip that will help make some portion of my photography work flow better. I only mention this because you mentioned there are probably 2 types of people watching this video. I guess that is reason enough to get some education. Yes?
Thanks so much, for all the information you give out. I was lead to believe printing to an Epson printer LR converted to 360, whatever settings we used (Jeff Schewe?)
Thanks for a great video on this. I've never looked to see in either PS or LR whether it was possible to increase the size of a file for printing purposes. In wildlife, when one might crop to make more of a subject this would be great. Is this a good solution with a crop sensor for the rare occasion I want to print something big? The biggest I've ever printed is 20x30. which is great, even with a crop sensor. Even at 20x30, presumably increasing the size slightly result in a sharper print at 20x30. My images, uncrossed come our at 5,184x3,456 (17.91 mp). I wonder what the optimum sizing is for printing much bigger, without sacrificing image quality.
this might be a dumb question, when you say to do a test print...should those test prints be on the same medium you want to use your final print? could I save some dimes by test printing on a more paper paper rather than photo paper? lol hope that made sense
Thanks Matt, yepp, guess, I’m gonna stick to PS/LR only for my coming enlargement/print jobs which will be sent to the lab. But there is still one question: Wouldn’t you recommend to (re-) sharpen the enlarged photo before printing? Thanks!
Matt, Thank you for the great video. Does this great performance of Lr in resizing continue to hold as you go into the mobile apps (especially iOS?). The mobile app seem to resize fine but I don't really have a comparison. I have only tried 2x resizing on Lr for iPhone. Do you know if there is a limit? This is especially useful when using ProRAW files since they start out quite clean, i.e. without artifacts. Thanks for the learning you provide. Stan
Hi Patrick - yes, Noise Reduction is not something I have a rule about when it comes to enlargements. It's a separate process if the photo needs it and 90% of the time for me, it doesn't. And if it did need it, I'd do the noise reduction in Lightroom or sometimes Topaz.
Matt for a 24 MP camera like my Sony a6500, what would be the maximum upsize you would recommend and at what dpi (150 ? ) thanks. When i don't upscale i send 300dpi jpegs to my print lab but if i ever need to upsize for larger prints just wondering as the largest print sizes i do now is 16x20 and 12x18
Do you have any courses that cover printing in detail (soft proofing, making adjustments to compensate for paper type, prepping an image for printing that will be sent to a print lab, etc)? Thanks.
Hi. It'll mean something different for everyone (in inches) depending on what you have PPI set to so it wouldn't matter if I chose inches because it would likely be different on your computer.
Inches are OK for the USA, Brits over a certain age (inc. me) and a few other countries but most work in metric - my 40+ year old 'children' only understand milli/centi/kilo/metres.
Just divide the pixels. So if you had a 2000x1000 image at 200 dpi that would be 10 inches by 5 inches. But if it was 100 dpi itc would be 20x10 inches. Covert to metric is on your phone or internet ;)
Hi. It’ll work on any printer. I’ve used multiple canon and Epson printers over the last 20 years as well as multiple online labs and 240 is more than enough for most prints at normal viewing distances.
Hi Quentin - it's going to vary based on every photo. I typically don't even think about pushing it too far until I'm upsizing to over 300-400%. But again, it's going to differ. You'll have to look at your results for that photo, and figure out where you're showing this off at (print, etc...) and if it looks acceptable. Hope that helps!
Quite a few years ago I upsized an image in PS from a Sony Alpha 100 (yes, that long ago) to an image that was going to be printed on perspex to 240 cm x 80 cm. I sold that to a law firm and they hung it in one of their conference rooms, which wasn't really big so you could see the image quite close. The company that printed it for me advised me on the quality of the print. They were happy with the upsize, I and the people at the law firm were happy. I think the print is still in their art collection.
Matt Kloskowski thanks, however I’ve looked there a few times and it wasn’t giving that option. That said I don’t know which versions this is. I just started and it’s $9.99/month.
Lightroom uses same engine behind the scene as Ps. Ps is just better doing some of the heavy lifting on some video intense things. But Lr is all you need 95% of the time
Matt, thanks. I wish you'd do a photography tutorial package for those of us that aren't beginners. Your teaching style is 👍.
Hi Jody. I have plenty of courses that aren't for beginners. Just head to mattk.com/course-list
My landscape course, luminosity mask, printing, no light no problem, texture blending, are among a few of the ones that are not geared for beginners. Thanks!
Thanks Matt for your no nonsense practical advice. I am totally comfortable with PS and LR, and too old to go trying new programs and plug ins just for the sake of it.
Great that you show folks that buying a lot of plug ins that do what Photoshop can do and just as well as the plug ins. So much marking hype in this world
Compared your suggestion to Topaz Megapixel software and Topaz was the winner hands down. Wish I could post the files here. The clarity and sharpness blew away Lightroom.
Matt, I just found you. I love your teaching method. I have a friend who needs to jump into editing but he doesn't want the extra BS of other programs. I'm sending him your way.
Awesome, thank you!
Use Lightroom is all a photographer needs. Ps is bloated with non photog stuff. You will be overwhelmed and give up if you start with Ps. Start with Lightroom.. itc was made by and for photogs. Trust me. Lightroom can do so so much these days is not even funny
Awesome Matt. I’m a first time watcher....very clear for a beginner like me.
Matt is one of THE best out there and so cool. Be sure to check out all his videos. Very very. Also check out his all day classes on Creative Live
Thoreau once quipped that he could never understand where the term "Common Sense" came from, "For it is anything but common." Happily common sense is commonly found in videos done by Matt, this being one of them! Thanks Matt!
Ha... my wife and I joke about common sense just about every day as we watch the news... Thanks! :-)
Great tips!!🙌🏾🙌🏾 would love some info about the wooden wall in the background.😇
Thanks. Home Depot.com stick on planks :-)
@@MattKloskowski thank you!
Thanks Matt! I haven't printed an enlargement before, but have a few now that I want to. I am sure that using this process will save me grief on the other side from doing what I was going to do, which was just submitting a photo and hoping it turned out alright and then wondering what to do when it didn't. It's going to be my first 16x20, so here's hoping!
As always, thanks for explaining this in detail Matt. I avoid enlarging whenever possible (as we all do) but when absolutely necessary, I find it worth trying something I used to do in Photoshop before the 2.0 option became available. Say you wanted to increase the dimensions of a 2000x2000 px image up to 4000x4000 px. First I use the 'best' enlargement algorithm (now 2.0) and increase the size to 8000x8000 px. Then use the 'best' reduction algorithm to bring this down to the required 4000x4000 size. It can be hit and miss - it often tends to achieve a decent result around edges, but can introduce artefacts in less well-defined areas. As I say, I often try this 'over-enlarge + reduction' method and compare against the 'straight' enlargement and am occasionally pleased with the results.
Thanks so much, was having difficulty enlarging a photo that was pixelating and this was the solution I was looking for!!!!!
Thanks so much Matt, great video as always
Great information, Matt! Thank you.
Glad it was helpful!
Good to know that LR uses an upsampling algorithm that is so similar to PS.
I love the printer/lab I send my work to, but they give me conflicting answers as to whether I should do the upsampling or if they do it for me.
Great explanation, Matt!
Great tutorial Matt, thank you!
Thank you so much! Im now able to submit for magazine publication!
Thank you very much for this Matt
Would have been interesting to see the 'raw' version of the image without using these tools to see the comparison when you did the overlay. This will be a great option going forward (versus purchasing other software I would very rarely need). Thanks!
Very interesting...you challenged me to experiment using Lightroom, Photoshop and Gigapixel on a picture of a flower. The Raw file came from my Sony A7RII and was 7952x5304 out of camera Using the same image I upsized it to 10,000 pixels using the methods you described and as a comparison used Gigapixel. One thing you did not talk about was output quality or noise reduction or output sharpening which can in my opinion one of the issues when upsizing. You commented about using the resample but not specifically about noise or sharpening a key issue when upsizing. In fact I think I saw that you left noise reduction at 0% in Photoshop.
Lightroom has an adjustment for output sharpen during the upsizing but I found in the past that in many cases it over sharpened the images even when I was not upsizing the output so I usually turn it off but for the purposes of my experiment I turned it on and set the level to standard. In Photoshop I set the image size to 10,000 and made sure resample was set the way you suggested and even though you did not talk about noise reduction I set that at 50%. Next I used Gigapixel which you may know has several additional sliders dealing with suppressing noise, removing blur and a click on/off for reduce color bleed. For purposes of my experiment I set suppress noise to 50% and remove blur to 50% after thinking the Photoshop method may do both but no way to know. I did not click on reduce color bleed and used the Standard for photo type.
After pixel peeping all three, Lightroom was the worst mostly because it did not do well with the additional noise during the upsize. Gigapixel and Photoshop were much better in dealing with the noise and sharpening and in my opinion Photoshop did ever so slightly better but not enough to call it a winner...it is built in and it works. However Gigapixel has setting for the subject of the photo or mode in addition to sliders for noise and blur and as I mentioned color bleed and face refinement which means in my opinion I will lean toward Gigapixel all things considered.
I appreciate that resizing in Lightroom and Photoshop is built in but some of us like what the other tools offer and sometimes it is worth looking at the additional capabilities of the other tools.
Hi Andy. I honestly don't mess with any of those settings when upsizing. I've shot with large megapixel cameras since the D800 first came out so very seldom do I have to even upsize. What I've personally found is that while you will definitely see differences in Adobe as well as plug-ins, the differences are not real world. Pixel peeping is different. First, nobody will ever see the before/after or comparisons or the pixel peeped version. They'll only see what I decide to print. And in my tests over time, what I've found is that I can put all different versions up on the wall and at a normal viewing distance for say, a 17x22, and I can't tell. Were there differences when I pixel peeped on the computer? Yep. But not in my prints when viewed by real eyes at a realistic distance. For that reason, it's not worth it (in my workflow personally, and for most of those people that just print for fun and not work) to add yet another program in to the mix. I always judge based on how it looks on the wall and resizing the way I showed here works well for all of my prints when I need it. Thanks!
This is an awesome description of what can be done in resizing. For my level, it sounds like LR and PS is going to get me where I want to be, but if I was printing something big for a show, I might want to invest in the plug-in for select images. Thank you for taking the time to write it all out.
Excellent tutorial. Does "enhance" in Lightroom have the same effect for printing, or is that just to enhance when cropping?
Thanks a lot, more about printing will help.
I'll watch a video & almost always to the end no matter what because, if I get even only 1 tip that will help make some portion of my photography work flow better. I only mention this because you mentioned there are probably 2 types of people watching this video. I guess that is reason enough to get some education. Yes?
Should you resize before or after you do noise reduction and/or sharpening? I would think after, but I wanted to hear your advice on this.
Thanks so much, for all the information you give out. I was lead to believe printing to an Epson printer LR converted to 360, whatever settings we used (Jeff Schewe?)
Thanks for the lesson, Matt. What budget friendly printer would you recommend for printing photos in 16x20 inches? Thank you.
Hi. I’d recommend either the Epson P700 or P900. Thanks
@@MattKloskowski Thank you for your advice Matt. Much appreciated!
Great advice.
Thanks for a great video on this. I've never looked to see in either PS or LR whether it was possible to increase the size of a file for printing purposes. In wildlife, when one might crop to make more of a subject this would be great. Is this a good solution with a crop sensor for the rare occasion I want to print something big? The biggest I've ever printed is 20x30. which is great, even with a crop sensor. Even at 20x30, presumably increasing the size slightly result in a sharper print at 20x30. My images, uncrossed come our at 5,184x3,456 (17.91 mp). I wonder what the optimum sizing is for printing much bigger, without sacrificing image quality.
Hello Matt, question, how well does the resizing work if you have graphic elements in the photo? Will the text or graphics be pixelated on upsizing?
Hi Dominic - there's no "rule" for this. Every image will be different so your eyes will be your best judge of quality.
Informative..... Thank you!
this might be a dumb question, when you say to do a test print...should those test prints be on the same medium you want to use your final print? could I save some dimes by test printing on a more paper paper rather than photo paper? lol hope that made sense
Does this work the same if you want to shrink a photo to let's say the size of a business card or a CD cover?
Thanks Matt, yepp, guess, I’m gonna stick to PS/LR only for my coming enlargement/print jobs which will be sent to the lab. But there is still one question: Wouldn’t you recommend to (re-) sharpen the enlarged photo before printing? Thanks!
Hi. You could sharpen it if you felt the photo needs it.
Matt, Thank you for the great video. Does this great performance of Lr in resizing continue to hold as you go into the mobile apps (especially iOS?). The mobile app seem to resize fine but I don't really have a comparison. I have only tried 2x resizing on Lr for iPhone. Do you know if there is a limit? This is especially useful when using ProRAW files since they start out quite clean, i.e. without artifacts.
Thanks for the learning you provide.
Stan
Hi Stan. I don't know and haven't tried it but you can always give it a try and compare and let us know the results. Thanks!
Thank you!
Thanks, Matt. This cleared up allot of things for me. I wish I hadn't bought Gigapixel AI now. :)
It's still a good program and I think it lets you batch which can be useful too!
What about with your phone like my android? Instead of computer .?
What do you suggest for the reduce noise slider? I notice yours set at 0. Is that where you leave it all the time?
Hi Patrick - yes, Noise Reduction is not something I have a rule about when it comes to enlargements. It's a separate process if the photo needs it and 90% of the time for me, it doesn't. And if it did need it, I'd do the noise reduction in Lightroom or sometimes Topaz.
And I save the money.....Thank you Matt!
Matt for a 24 MP camera like my Sony a6500, what would be the maximum upsize you would recommend and at what dpi (150 ? ) thanks. When i don't upscale i send 300dpi jpegs to my print lab but if i ever need to upsize for larger prints just wondering as the largest print sizes i do now is 16x20 and 12x18
Hi Matt, If you were going from 3000px to 10000px would you do it in one step? We were tough 10% at a time maybe old school.
Hi Dave. The 10% upsizing trick was no longer needed about 10+ years ago. Just do it all at once :-)
Do you have any courses that cover printing in detail (soft proofing, making adjustments to compensate for paper type, prepping an image for printing that will be sent to a print lab, etc)? Thanks.
Hi Mac. Yes, my Perfect Print course if you go to mattk.com and click on COURSES at the top. Or just go to mattk.com/print
Thanks!
@@MattKloskowski Thanks Matt! I'll definitely check it out. So few good tutorials on this subject, imo.
Does the iPad have this
Thanks for the info! But I wished you had used inches instead of 8000ppi? I know you can see it later but I want to know what 8000 means.
Hi. It'll mean something different for everyone (in inches) depending on what you have PPI set to so it wouldn't matter if I chose inches because it would likely be different on your computer.
Inches are OK for the USA, Brits over a certain age (inc. me) and a few other countries but most work in metric - my 40+ year old 'children' only understand milli/centi/kilo/metres.
Just divide the pixels. So if you had a 2000x1000 image at 200 dpi that would be 10 inches by 5 inches. But if it was 100 dpi itc would be 20x10 inches. Covert to metric is on your phone or internet ;)
Which printer do you use where 240 ppi works for you?
Hi. It’ll work on any printer. I’ve used multiple canon and Epson printers over the last 20 years as well as multiple online labs and 240 is more than enough for most prints at normal viewing distances.
How far can you push upscaling in LR and PS?
Hi Quentin - it's going to vary based on every photo. I typically don't even think about pushing it too far until I'm upsizing to over 300-400%. But again, it's going to differ. You'll have to look at your results for that photo, and figure out where you're showing this off at (print, etc...) and if it looks acceptable. Hope that helps!
Quite a few years ago I upsized an image in PS from a Sony Alpha 100 (yes, that long ago) to an image that was going to be printed on perspex to 240 cm x 80 cm. I sold that to a law firm and they hung it in one of their conference rooms, which wasn't really big so you could see the image quite close. The company that printed it for me advised me on the quality of the print. They were happy with the upsize, I and the people at the law firm were happy. I think the print is still in their art collection.
Why is Lightroom not giving me the option to resize pictures in export?
Hi. If you are using Lightroom Classic, when you go to File > Export there were always be a choice in there to resize the photo. Hope that helps.
Matt Kloskowski thanks, however I’ve looked there a few times and it wasn’t giving that option. That said I don’t know which versions this is. I just started and it’s $9.99/month.
@@MattKloskowski OK I just checked and I'm using version 4.3 from the Mac App store. Maybe that's the problem?
Hi. Yes. You’re not using Lightroom Classic which is what this tutorial was based on.
Dope!
So Lightroom automatically uses the the same math as Enhance details 2.0 in photoshop. Thx Matt, good to know
Lightroom uses same engine behind the scene as Ps. Ps is just better doing some of the heavy lifting on some video intense things. But Lr is all you need 95% of the time
On1 resize.
Yeah i heard on1 resize is really good..i have it but haven't tried it yet