# Cropping



## ray5 (Aug 25, 2014)

Hi,
I recently cropped some images and when uploaded to a printing site they would not fit their specs. and got cropped even more to fit their dimensions. How does one crop without having these issues? Are their any dimensions to be kept in mind for a specific print size? If I take an image straight out of camera with no cropping this issue does not happen and I can pick and choose whatever print size I want without worrying about the file size or dimensions. Please educate. Thanks
Ray


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 25, 2014)

ray5 said:


> when uploaded to a printing site they *would not fit their specs*. and got cropped even more to fit *their dimensions*. How does one crop without having these issues?



I expect that's entirely dependent on that printing site. May want to check their FAQs or contact them for assistance.


----------



## fragilesi (Aug 25, 2014)

ray5 said:


> Hi,
> I recently cropped some images and when uploaded to a printing site they would not fit their specs. and got cropped even more to fit their dimensions. How does one crop without having these issues? Are their any dimensions to be kept in mind for a specific print size? If I take an image straight out of camera with no cropping this issue does not happen and I can pick and choose whatever print size I want without worrying about the file size or dimensions. Please educate. Thanks
> Ray



Did you crop to a custom aspect ratio?


----------



## ray5 (Aug 25, 2014)

Not sure what custom aspect ratio means? I just cropped the image to the content I thought I wanted. WHat is interesting is, I am trialling a new printing service so sent the same images to both and only one of them cropped the images but not the other.


----------



## cid (Aug 25, 2014)

I use this simple procedure
[list type=decimal]
[*]crop image into desired aspect ratio
[*]check it's pixel resolution
[*]divide each side using desired printing DPI
[*]get actual picture size
[/list]

or another way, if I want to fit the image to some size and then resample the image according the resolution it should have 

but maybe there is some more sophisticated procedure to do this, guys?


----------



## jpete03 (Aug 25, 2014)

I'm not sure which program you're using to crop. In the lightroom cropping tool there's a lock that constrains your proportions to the original image proportions, or a drop down to choose quick proportions for various sizes. If you uncheck the lock, then you get free cropping, and you can do all sorts of custom proportions.

I've really only run into problems with labs when the pixel dimensions are not large enough to support the quality for the size wanted (2000 pixels on short side for 8x10 for example).

If you've used custom crop dimensions, you may want to contact your lab to find out if you need to do something special to have that printed, that may be the issue you're running into.


----------



## ray5 (Aug 25, 2014)

I used Photoshop CS5. I am very new to photoshop so don't know much. When I used the crop tool it did not restrict me but perhaps a box needs to be checked? Sounds like that might be helpful. Anyone has any ideas?


----------



## unfocused (Aug 25, 2014)

Click on the crop tool. At the top of the screen, there is a bar with a number of selections for the crop tool. You'll see another image of the crop tool with a little down arrow beside it. Click the arrow. You'll see a whole bunch of aspect ratios (dimensions). Pick the one you want and it will constrain the crop to match those dimensions.


----------



## cid (Aug 25, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Click on the crop tool. At the top of the screen, there is a bar with a number of selections for the crop tool. You'll see another image of the crop tool with a little down arrow beside it. Click the arrow. You'll see a whole bunch of aspect ratios (dimensions). Pick the one you want and it will constrain the crop to match those dimensions.



or click C key, holdt shift then click on edge of crop overlay, it should retain original aspect ratio
or look here

cropping tutorial


----------



## ray5 (Aug 26, 2014)

Thanks for all the help.
Since I am learning Photoshop I want to keep it simple if possible. As I had mentioned when I take a picture straight out of the camera and do not crop , I am able to upload and print to any size as long as the resolution allows. I guess that way I am preserving the aspect ratio. That's all I want to do. When I go to the drop down menu it asks me to choose the final image size and I guess it will limit my crop specific to that size. In the drop down menu it goes from 4" by 6" to 8" by 10" with some more options in between. So what if I want a 16 by 20 print? I guess by choosing any of the options on the drop down down menu it should still work?

When I wrote to one of the services here is what they suggested:

For a 4 x 6" print: Your image should have an aspect ratio of 1:1.5 
For a 5 x 7" prints: Your image should have an aspect ratio of 1:1.4 
For an 8 x 10" print: Your image should have an aspect ratio of 1:1.25 
For a 16 x 20" print: Your image should have an aspect ratio of 1:1.25 
For a 20 x 30" print: Your image should have an aspect ratio of 1:1.5 
For a Wallet-size print: Your image should have an aspect ratio of 1:1.4

Second question:
How do I make my cropping non destructive?
Thanks
Ray


----------



## ray5 (Aug 26, 2014)

jpete03 said:


> * In the lightroom cropping tool there's a lock that constrains your proportions to the original image proportions, or a drop down to choose quick proportions for various sizes. * If you uncheck the lock,
> 
> 
> That's what I want to do. Know how to lock so it constrains to the original image proportions. And then I can choose quick proportions when I know for sure what size I want. Is there something similar lock in Photoshop CS5?


----------



## unfocused (Aug 26, 2014)

ray5 said:


> jpete03 said:
> 
> 
> > * In the lightroom cropping tool there's a lock that constrains your proportions to the original image proportions, or a drop down to choose quick proportions for various sizes. * If you uncheck the lock,
> ...


----------



## ray5 (Aug 26, 2014)

Dear unfocused,
I did read your post. I now realize that the two blank boxes to it's right are for other sizes. I don't see any option for aspect ratio in PS5. But then if I have the sizes then I am all set. And I assume when none of these options are chosen then I have a free hand at cropping. 

All of these are ONLY important for printing purposes on standard sizes? So, in case I do free cropping to the image I really want and that image does not fulfill the aspect ratios of the printing lab, then I can't print those in the sizes I want or the lab prints? Or is there a way to "expand" or "shrink" that image to fit the standard print sizes? I realize that this question is silly but as I learn more I realize that my ignorance of PS is as vast as PS's capability itself. 

I guess the answer to my question about editing to one size and then printing to different sizes won't work as the print sizes have different aspect ratios.
I don't see the "delete cropped pixels" box in PS5. Thanks for your help.
Ray


----------



## dgatwood (Aug 26, 2014)

Don't forget that most printers also require bleed, which is a certain amount of extra content that deliberately gets thrown away to ensure that you don't end up with white edges.


----------



## Logan (Aug 26, 2014)

some printing places will print "odd sizes"

photo paper only comes in certain sizes, and some places only carry certain sizes. the solution is to print on the size that fits the long dimension, and then cut off the white paper. some places dont like to do this.

the printing place that i use will make and mount odd sizes, however, their software makes is so that unless you tell them in advance, they dont know there is more picture there, their print software just zooms in to fill the whole print, even if its less than half the photo. 

all printing places will list the sizes that they offer, and the suggested resolution for each size (inches x 300 is a good rule of thumb if they dont say) 

the easiest solution is to crop to the aspect of the size you want, if you want 16"x9", crop to 4:3. (16/9=4/3) In photoshop or lightroom you can just type in the size you want and then adjust the frame to fit the content you want.

your problem has nothing to do with photoshop, you are uploading pictures that are shaped wrong for the size of paper you are asking them printed on. you need to match the shape of the paper to the shape of the photo. that is called "aspect ratio". aspect ratio is just a fancy way of saying "shape". an 8"x10" is almost square, you cant upload a long thin photo (aspect ratio 1:3 aka 10:30 aka 5:15), its three times as long as it is tall, how are you going to print it on 8x10? 

if photoshop gives you two boxes for aspect ratio, just put in the size you want to print. its just fractions, 1/2 = 2/4 = 3/6 = 5/10

if you want multiple sizes of prints from a single photo, either make copies and crop to the different shapes, or pick sizes that are all the same shape. 4x6, 8x12, 16x24, these are all the same shape (aka aspect ratio)

did any of that help?


----------



## unfocused (Aug 26, 2014)

ray5 said:


> So, in case I do free cropping to the image I really want and that image does not fulfill the aspect ratios of the printing lab, then I can't print those in the sizes I want or the lab prints? Or is there a way to "expand" or "shrink" that image to fit the standard print sizes?



Okay, first I said what you are supposed to do. Let me explain what I really do.

I really prefer the native aspect ratio of DSLRs. I try to fill the frame and not crop. Just something I've done for years. 

In the 'old' days it was something of a point of pride among photographers to print all the way to the edge of the negative and show the black lines that came through from the clear edges of the film. The idea was to show that what you printed was the exact image you took, without need for cropping.

Anyway, I still usually prefer the dimensions of a uncropped image. Fortunately, these days most of the better photo labs (I use MPix) have a wide range of sizes in a variety of aspect ratios. For example, you can order a 12 x 18 print or a 15 x 24 print that comes very close to the original proportions of the DSLR frame.

I seldom even think about aspect ratio when I work on a picture. I crop it to what I think looks best and can usually find a print size that comes pretty close to that same ratio. 

Now, here are a couple of other things to know or consider.

When cropping an image in photoshop, if you take the crop tool and drag it out to the edges of your image so that basically it outlines the edge with no cropping then you can hold down the shift key and grab any corner of the frame and pull it in without changing the ratio. (This "constraining" works with almost all the Photoshop tools by the way)

So, say you know you want a 12 x 18 print (same dimensions as the original frame) but want to crop the image a little, just drag one corner in while holding down the shift key. Don't worry that the crop isn't exactly where you want it. You can do that with each corner until you have it about where you want it. Then you can click inside the frame and drag the image around until it is exactly where you want it. Get it where you want it, hit enter and the image will be cropped.

Another option. Let's say none of the print size choices fit the ratio you really want. For example, you've shot a panoramic image that is like 8 inches tall and 24 inches wide. Create a new layer and fill it with white (use the paint bucket--be sure the white square is the foreground color in the two squares near the bottom of the tool bar. Use the little arrow to toggle back and forth between white and black and background and foreground) . 

Move that layer to the bottom, so it is underneath your picture. Now, go to "image" and select Canvas size. Since 8 x 24 isn't a standard print size, pick a size that is. Say 15 x 24. 

Now, both layers will be over a background (most likely transparent) that is the full 15 x 24 size. Select your white layer and resize it. (edit menu - transform-scale) to fill the full 15 x 24 size. Now, select the layer that has your picture on it and do any minor adjustments on it that might be needed to get it to fit within the 15 x 24 canvas. (use the same edit menu- transform-scale to resize your picture, holding down the shift key so you don't change the proportions of the image. 

Basically, you'll have your picture on a white background with the background matching a standard picture size and your actual image the size you want it. Save a jpeg (which will flatten the image) and then you can order a print in the standard size and it will end up as a print with a white background. You'll have to matte it of course to fit your image, but this is a cheap way to get a custom print size from printers. 

As I said in the earlier post, I do this a lot when I want a quick print from Walgreens. I create an 8x10 white fill layer and then paste and resize my image to fit inside the 8 x 10 frame (it's usually about 7 x 10) I'm trying to attach an example. It's not a great picture, but it might help you visualize what I mean. 

You can then order prints from anywhere in the standard size (8 x 10) but the final print will be your uncropped or cropped image with white around it. Again, you'll have to matte it to fit a standard frame.


----------



## ray5 (Aug 26, 2014)

Dear unfocussed,
Thanks a lot for that. I too like to take the time to compose such that I don't have to crop. For the most part that's why I am so ignorant as I hadn't had to do it often. I like the native aspect ratio. I came to this only beacuse I did crop a couple of images without regard to the aspect ratios and then couldn't print the way I had cropped as it did not fit the ratio of the printing lab. What was strange is I uploaded to two labs to compare their prints and decide on one of them for future use, and one took the upload as is but the other cropped it further to fit their aspect ratio. Anyway, I know a lot more now. Still learning the very basics of layers. Any good tutorial you could suggest? Thanks again.
Ray


----------



## unfocused (Aug 26, 2014)

I am old so I like books. I like to be able to flip through pages with the program on screen, rather than switch back and forth between screens. I like Scott kelby's books because they fit my style of learning. I can jump around and pick and choose lessons (I am unfocused after all) 
In fact I'm at a kelby workshop today.
But there are also a ton of resources online on the adobe website and help menu.


----------



## ray5 (Aug 26, 2014)

unfocused said:


> I am old so I like books. I like to be able to flip through pages with the program on screen, rather than switch back and forth between screens. I like Scott kelby's books because they fit my style of learning. I can jump around and pick and choose lessons (I am unfocused after all)
> In fact I'm at a kelby workshop today.
> But there are also a ton of resources online on the adobe website and help menu.



;D, Thanks


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 27, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Another option. Let's say none of the print size choices fit the ratio you really want. For example, you've shot a panoramic image that is like 8 inches tall and 24 inches wide. Create a new layer and fill it with white (use the paint bucket--be sure the white square is the foreground color in the two squares near the bottom of the tool bar. Use the little arrow to toggle back and forth between white and black and background and foreground) .
> 
> Move that layer to the bottom, so it is underneath your picture. Now, go to "image" and select Canvas size. Since 8 x 24 isn't a standard print size, pick a size that is. Say 15 x 24.
> 
> ...



I would never recommend doing that for photos, graphics or text, coloured layers fine, but not for photos. Transform-scale is destructive, it will also cause pixelation very quickly.

If you want to make a 15x24 with a fill layer to prevent printer auto cropping there is a better way, isn't there always!

Open your image, go Image-Image Size, check the Constrain Proportions and the Resample Image boxes, put in the resolution you want, 240 dpi is fine for prints, then put in the side that fits, for a 3:2 image you'd put the 15" side in and that would give you a 15x22.5 printed area. Click OK.

Then go to the canvas size and increase that to 15x24 press OK, job done. No need for layers or transforming.

Make sure you Save As, then the print file will be saved as a different file separate to your original.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 27, 2014)

In trying to make it as simple as possible, I apparently wasn't as clear as I thought.

Private is correct, in that Transform is destructive. Which is why I said you want to do a "save as" so you don't affect your original file. I was also thinking in terms of reducing an image to fit a preferred print size. Going down in size isn't a problem with transform, but if you go up in size, you do need to use the image size dialogue. 

Changing Canvas size is fine as long as the canvas is larger than the original and you have your background color set to white. But, if you only have one layer, you can't easily reposition the image, which is why I prefer to use a separate layer filled with white.

As with most everything in Photoshop, there are any number of ways to arriving at the same end. There isn't one correct answer, just the one that works best for you.


----------



## distant.star (Aug 27, 2014)

.
Excellent discussion.

I don't think I've ever seen it talked about here, and I think lots of folks will find it very helpful.


----------



## ray5 (Aug 27, 2014)

I certainly learnt a lot from this discussion. Thanks to all!


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Aug 29, 2014)

distant.star said:


> .
> Excellent discussion.
> 
> I don't think I've ever seen it talked about here, and I think lots of folks will find it very helpful.



Definitely! If I can ever find it again!


----------



## Logan (Sep 4, 2014)

ray5 said:


> Dear unfocussed,
> Thanks a lot for that. I too like to take the time to compose such that I don't have to crop. For the most part that's why I am so ignorant as I hadn't had to do it often. I like the native aspect ratio. I came to this only beacuse I did crop a couple of images without regard to the aspect ratios and then couldn't print the way I had cropped as it did not fit the ratio of the printing lab. What was strange is I uploaded to two labs to compare their prints and decide on one of them for future use, and one took the upload as is but the other cropped it further to fit their aspect ratio. Anyway, I know a lot more now. Still learning the very basics of layers. Any good tutorial you could suggest? Thanks again.
> Ray



its because of the software the print lab uses. some crops it automatically and unless they manually resize it they cant even tell there is more picture there. some labs may not want the extra hassle of dealing with off sizes. 

i go to a place called london drugs (not sure where you live) and if you ask nicely they will print odd sizes on the next size up of paper (10x7 would get printed on 10x8 and charged accordingly), and cut off the white for you, including if you have it mounted on foam. saves the trouble of screwing around in photoshop. although privates method of altering canvas size is pretty fool-proof.


----------



## ray5 (Sep 9, 2014)

So lets say you don't have a final size in mind for a print(or have no plans for a print) and are just editing the image. Do you crop to a specific aspect ratio? Or do you edit but not crop? Thanks


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 9, 2014)

ray5 said:


> So lets say you don't have a final size in mind for a print(or have no plans for a print) and are just editing the image. Do you crop to a specific aspect ratio? Or do you edit but not crop? Thanks



Personally I do all the edit, and any minor crop to straighten horizon or building edges etc and then leave it. If I have to crop later for layout considerations I will do it non destructively on a per output basis.

One of the coolest things about more recent PS versions, at least CS6 and on but maybe CS5 as well, is the option to not delete cropped pixels.


----------



## JonAustin (Sep 9, 2014)

Logan said:


> the easiest solution is to crop to the aspect of the size you want, if you want 16"x9", crop to 4:3. (16/9=4/3) In photoshop or lightroom you can just type in the size you want and then adjust the frame to fit the content you want.



Sorry, but in what mathematical universe does 16/9 = 4/3?

(Good discussion in general in this thread; I've learned all of this through trial and error over the years.)


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 9, 2014)

ray5 said:


> Since I am learning Photoshop I want to keep it simple if possible.



"Photoshop" implicitly contradicts "simple". If you are ok with the tool ACR provides, you could probably have a look at Lightroom - it's much more streamlined for a digitial photography workflow and the answer to question such as yours might be more obvious.



ray5 said:


> How do I make my cropping non destructive?



Could you elaborate what "non destructive" means here? Until pdb wrote the opposite I though if you crop traditional pixel image and then save, the cropped area is gone, but I'm not familiar with the newest PS versions. In any case that's again where Lightroom and the ACR tools in Photoshop excel - they're always non-destructive and you can quickly make several virtual copies with different settings and croppings.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 9, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> ray5 said:
> 
> 
> > How do I make my cropping non destructive?
> ...



I forget if it came in CS5 or CS6, but in the crop tool you get this box to check, or not. If you leave it unchecked you can always recrop, uncrop, return to the original, even if you save and close.


----------



## ray5 (Sep 9, 2014)

Likely CS6, I have the CS5 and didn't see that box


----------



## ray5 (Sep 9, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> ray5 said:
> 
> 
> > Since I am learning Photoshop I want to keep it simple if possible.
> ...




I agree that PS and simplicity do not go together.
What I have done a bit is play with the sliders in ACR and then ported the image to PS. I like the global sliders in ACR. I also saw some videos which made an average image into an awesome one using PS. I am not sure I want to do that but that is a separate discussion. It does amaze me how capable PS is.
Before I jump for another software which is million miles ahead of my capability what does Lightroom offer that PS does not? Or is it just easier for a novice like me to use?
Your next question has been answered by PVD.
Thanks,
Ray


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 9, 2014)

ray5 said:


> Before I jump for another software which is million miles ahead of my capability what does Lightroom offer that PS does not? Or is it just easier for a novice like me to use?



Lightroom is a subset of Photoshop plus stellar library management. In PS, you have the Adobe Camera Raw Filters (ACR) - LR is basically just a frontend for these. One good thing is that the whole ACR workflow is always non-destructive, and keeping the raw data results in a 20mb dng instead of a 100mb tif per shot.

But for me, the missing layer and plugin features of LR are a blessing, because if you cannot do it with ACR you really need to ask yourself if you aren't over-postprocessing the shot or simply should have done better on the scene. I only use 3rd party apps for hdr assembly or panorama stitching.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 9, 2014)

ray5 said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > ray5 said:
> ...



Cropping in ACR is totally non destructive.

Lightroom is a better buy for most photographers than PS. LR is an asset management program that has the complete ACR module under the Develop tab, everything you can do in ACR you can do in LR, and a lot more besides. LR is more like an integrated version of Bridge, ACR and PS, though it can't handle all the file types Bridge can and it can't do many of the complicated stuff PS can. It is a very good program and I recommend it as the best $125 a keen photographer can spend, just being able to manage all your files is worth the money but it does so much more too.

Everything you do in Lightroom is non destructive, you have to try really hard for it to actually ever touch your original image file.


----------



## Logan (Sep 10, 2014)

JonAustin said:


> Logan said:
> 
> 
> > the easiest solution is to crop to the aspect of the size you want, if you want 16"x9", crop to 4:3. (16/9=4/3) In photoshop or lightroom you can just type in the size you want and then adjust the frame to fit the content you want.
> ...



some kind of base sqrt2 universe? sorry, math fail. i was just looking for an example because explaining how equivalent fractions work is more difficult, most people can intuit them without know how or why. 16"x12" is 4:3. Lightroom just simplifies it automatically. PS just lets you type in any ratio too. so just punch in your print size as a ratio.

I usually crop for content and then make a virtual copy and crop for print to save having to do it multiple times. I put all the print crops in a collection so i can find them.


----------



## ray5 (Sep 10, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> ray5 said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...


Ok. So far my pictures are saved in iPhoto. Since I have now started to take interest in PS, I was going to find a way to now move all past and future images to ACR, but not started yet. I am hoping there is a way to do it. So if I now get LR I guess I should move to LR instead? Is there an easy way to get the older images in LR? In the interest of space and memory should I delete CS5 entirely and just default to LR? Thanks,
Ray


----------



## Logan (Sep 10, 2014)

ray5 said:


> Ok. So far my pictures are saved in iPhoto. Since I have now started to take interest in PS, I was going to find a way to now move all past and future images to ACR, but not started yet. I am hoping there is a way to do it. So if I now get LR I guess I should move to LR instead? Is there an easy way to get the older images in LR? In the interest of space and memory should I delete CS5 entirely and just default to LR? Thanks,
> Ray



yes, lightroom will let you import a large number of photos at one time, copying/moving/renaming them and even processing them as per your settings. you will confuse yourself if you think of them as "saved in iphoto". they are saved in the folder they are in, you do not need to "move" anything to edit them in a different program. once you understand how cataloging works i think it will be more clear, maybe someone has a link explaining sidecars vs databases etc.


----------



## ray5 (Sep 10, 2014)

Logan said:


> ray5 said:
> 
> 
> > Ok. So far my pictures are saved in iPhoto. Since I have now started to take interest in PS, I was going to find a way to now move all past and future images to ACR, but not started yet. I am hoping there is a way to do it. So if I now get LR I guess I should move to LR instead? Is there an easy way to get the older images in LR? In the interest of space and memory should I delete CS5 entirely and just default to LR? Thanks,
> ...


I am not sure I understand. When Iedit them, I have to open the image in ACR or PS from iPhoto. What I do want to do is make PS or LR as my default intake program from which I can edit as needed. Secondly, empty my iPhoto entirely and port and store all past images in the same place as well.


----------



## Logan (Sep 10, 2014)

The physical location of the photos should not change when you use different programs to view/edit them. Instead of using iphoto to catalogue them, (i'm assuming thats what it does), you can use lightroom, or bridge, or something else. it wont change where your photos are, but lightroom does let you move them when you import them if you wish, but its optional.


----------



## ray5 (Sep 11, 2014)

So here is a problem. Attached is a image I took. Now I want to print in a 8 by 10. When I use that aspect ratio I can't get the image I want. I want the water below the tower and some sky above. Unless I keep the aspect ratio of the original I just can't get the composition I desire. 
Had I wanted a simple paper print that might be okay with the white bars that the lab printed so they could use their standards but I want a metal print and obviously that wouldn't work on that. So do I have a way out? Or am I limited to maintain the original aspect ratio and print that size i.e 1:1.5
Which would mean a tiny 4 by 6 or a huge 16 by 20. Neither of which I desire. Thanks


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 11, 2014)

ray5 said:


> So here is a problem. Attached is a image I took. Now I want to print in a 8 by 10. When I use that aspect ratio I can't get the image I want. I want the water below the tower and some sky above. Unless I keep the aspect ratio of the original I just can't get the composition I desire.



I'll write a detailed method later, but I am between airports at the moment. here is your image to 8x10 as a teaser.


----------



## ray5 (Sep 11, 2014)

Wow! I'll wait for the detailed method. Your brilliance is equally matched by my ignorance ! The more I learn the more appalled I get at how little I know. Thanks a lot!


----------



## Logan (Sep 11, 2014)

its stretched out, but that might work for you. check the stairs in the bottom left and the tree.

ray, you are over thinking this buddy. you have a rectangle A, and you want it to be a rectangle B. forget the numbers. how do you make one rectangle into a different shaped rectangle?

ADD some material (white space to cut off, cloned sky, black silhouette if possible)
SUBTRACT some material (crop to the correct aspect)
STRETCH it (only works with some subjects)

if you wanted a tall narrow print and you took a wide thin panorama, what would you need to fix it? think about it. the differences between your picture and the available print sizes are smaller, but no different.

PS: metal prints are available in any shape or size you want. even custom shapes. try a different source maybe. regardless, it will look great, black and white night shots look amazing on aluminum.

http://www.adoramapix.com/app/products/metalprints

8x12 is 29.99 i think...


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 11, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> I'll write a detailed method later, but I am between airports at the moment. here is your image to 8x10 as a teaser.



I'm looking forward to it if your method includes non-linear stretch with PS.

For simple linear stretch you can also do it In Lightroom with a slider somewhat hidden in the manual lens corrections section. Minor corrections aren't visible and I sometimes do it, but the trees below Eiffel tower shots do indeed look like someone stomped them (no one knows how wide the stairs were, though).


----------



## ray5 (Sep 11, 2014)

Logan said:


> its stretched out, but that might work for you. check the stairs in the bottom left and the tree.
> 
> ray, you are over thinking this buddy. you have a rectangle A, and you want it to be a rectangle B. forget the numbers. how do you make one rectangle into a different shaped rectangle?
> 
> ...



Logan,
I agree that I am thinking too much into this. I need to be patient and learn. I think I got a bit frustrated that I'd rather spend more time shooting than behind the laptop but I understand that the latter is important as well. Though I would love to know what PVD did to stretch the image without it appearing distorted. What I did eventually is had a 12 by 18 metal done offered by the same lab. This will be my first so lets see how it turns out. They are expensive. Adoramapix is cheaper than the lab I am trying but I was not happy with the trial paper prints that they sent. They are sending a second set without the color corrections, so lets see. Thanks for you kind words.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 11, 2014)

ray5 said:


> The more I learn the more appalled I get at how little I know. Thanks a lot!



Speaking of not knowing things: I just added a poll because I'm interested in how many people usually crop and why: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=22666.0


----------



## ray5 (Sep 12, 2014)

Yup, have been reading some interesting posts. Feel slightly better now.


----------



## Logan (Sep 15, 2014)

ray5 said:


> Logan said:
> 
> 
> > its stretched out, but that might work for you. check the stairs in the bottom left and the tree.
> ...



it IS distorted, look at the bottom left. the tree is fat and the lines in the sidewalk are jaggy.
you are looking for a magic bullet. there isn't one. in limited circumstances you can edit more content into the picture, depending on your skill in PS, but that is the exception, not the rule. leaving the subject filling less of the frame gives you more room to crop. you filled the frame with the tower, and you have no room to crop.


----------



## ray5 (Sep 15, 2014)

Logan said:


> ray5 said:
> 
> 
> > Logan said:
> ...


Sure it is stretched but to me it is within acceptable range. What I meant is with the stretch it was still within acceptable distortion. I think what I am finding out is I have to keep these factors in mind when composing the shot. So far all I did was get the best shot disregarding everything else connected to post processing. I understand that the magic bullet doesn't exist. Thanks


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 19, 2014)

Sorry for the delay in answering, but I just got back from my travels.

I thought a screen capture video would better illustrate the technique so here it is. 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/12hc32ci12qscvx/content%20aware%20scale.mp4?dl=0

Obviously I am not very good at videos and was using a laptop through my desktop screen and kept using the wrong keyboard, and the audio sucks! But hopefully this is a good illustration of the technique and will continue the discussion.

Of course you can fine tune the technique and do the conversion in stages to better control what gets pulled etc, as I said, every image and output will probably require a different combination of techniques.


----------



## ray5 (Sep 19, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> Sorry for the delay in answering, but I just got back from my travels.
> 
> I thought a screen capture video would better illustrate the technique so here it is.
> 
> ...



Fantastic! Thanks so much for taking the time to do this. This exemplifies a couple of things.
- My total ignorance about PS
- Logan had correctly pointed out that I was thinking too hard but what PS can do is even beyond my imagination! 
Thanks again!


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 19, 2014)

Just did another video for people without Content Aware Scale, also this method will work better for many images. Knowing the various ways to do things gives you the flexibility to use the most appropriate technique for any particular image.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4wm56wtcjvn543u/Aspect%20ratio%20conversion.mp4?dl=0

Hope this helps.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 19, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> I thought a screen capture video would better illustrate the technique so here it is.



Great, thanks a lot for the video, with live commentary and all . It's always good to know what you can do better in PS because as a LR user I'm very unlikely just to stumble upon these.


----------

