1. Welcome to Photography Forum. Our photography community!

    Photography-forum is dedicated to those who have passion, desire and love of photography and want to improve their photographic technique. It doesn't matter what you photograph, landscapes, weddings, portraits or your photographic experience, it's about learning and loving what we do. Photography!

    If you want learn and expand your photography skills then there is one place to do it Photography Forum !!!

    You are viewing photography-forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view most forums and enjoy other features. By joining our free community you will be able to post photographs for critique, join in the monthly photography competitions, respond to polls, upload content and enjoy many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please join Photography Forum.

    If you have any problems please contact us.

    The Photography-Forum Team
    Dismiss Notice
  2. PLEASE SEE RULES BEFORE POSTING LINKS
    Click here to see Forum Rules

Losing quality when resizing in lightroom

Discussion in 'Photoshop & Editing Chat Forum' started by yasser, Sep 19, 2016.

  1. yasser

    yasser Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    359
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    I have lLightroom 5 (upgraded to 5.7.1) and I was looking at a couple of old shots I had and if I could improve them. After doing all editing I exported them to a file. The problem comes if I want to post them on here and have resize them. I have kept the quality slide upto 100 but when you look at the image its very soft and it only happens on resizing. If I just reduce file size to 246k for here and not resize there is not a problem. Here is an old shot I have, in Lightroom the Quality is good, you can count the rivets in the panels. However when I resize it it looses quality, you can not even read the white number just over the pilots left shoulder. Is there something that I can change or is it just one of the problems of resizing


    f15  test 8.jpg
     
  2. Snips

    Snips Old Hand Premium Member

    Messages:
    35,180
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    This is one of those things and we do take it into account on here, especially with woods and tree shots.

    If re-sizing from 4-5Mb to 245Kb, there is inevitably going to be some data loss.

    It just amazes me how little is lost in the quality.
     
    yasser likes this.
  3. MikeB

    MikeB Old Hand Premium Member

    Messages:
    11,333
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    Image looks good to me. The posted image is 187kb where 241kb (250kb Mac) is permitted - that is a 20% difference up front. You are at the 1024 limit so you have more room to improve the quality of the image. You say you are the max for quality setting (no compression), that would indicate to me that you are starting out with a very small image.

    The image itself is quite clean, little noise. I was able to review it at 400% and it held together nicely. If this is a crop from a much larger image then this may be as good as it gets (for 72ppi). Otherwise try not to downsize as much before converting to JPEG. I couldn't tell whether there was any sharpening of the aircraft's features, that might help as well - do not sharpen the sky.
     
    yasser likes this.
  4. yasser

    yasser Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    359
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    Thank you Edward and MikeB for your replies, the image has been cropped down form an original of 5760 x 3840 to 5171 x 2852 and I can then reduce this file down from 6.1 Mb to 287k with no loss apparent loss. Its only when I try and resize down to 1024 that I have a problem. I'll try an open a flicker account so you can view together with a link.

    Her are four saved images of the same shot.

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/145333495@N03/29498397050/in/album-72157673999092776/
    This is 5171 x 2852 and 7.1mb

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/145333495@N03/29677989652/in/album-72157673999092776/
    This is same size as above but file reduced to 239.5 k. Box ticked in lightroom to keep file limited to 256k

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/145333495@N03/29790763795/in/album-72157673999092776/
    resized to 1024 x 526 file not restricted but lightroom dropped it to 323.7k

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/145333495@N03/29165229473/in/album-72157673999092776/
    resized to 1024 x 526 file limited to 256 but lihgtroom dropped it to 187k

    Hopefully you can see these as I see them. I'm not that well up on editing but it seems that when I get an image I like, it seems to loose something when I save it. I also now belong to a local camera club and if I want to enter any pdi competions the size has to be 1024 with and unrestricted file size. if its a problem that effects everyone all well and good but i'll be a bit miffed if it is just me
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 19, 2016
  5. MikeB

    MikeB Old Hand Premium Member

    Messages:
    11,333
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    Just getting Page Not Found on all links.
     
  6. yasser

    yasser Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    359
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    sorry, had not unlocked the pics from private. I think they are all open now
     
  7. MikeB

    MikeB Old Hand Premium Member

    Messages:
    11,333
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    @yasser, the question was, can the image quality be improved? The answer is yes but only a little and probably not with Lightroom - any version. The size here is 1008 pixels on the long edge (rather than 1024) just to provide a simpler divide by 72ppi which is how it will be shown on the Web. I also us a multi-step approach to reducing the size of an image using different bicubic reduction methods. This is probably what eliminated the JPEG artifacts that can be seen in your submission. The reduction is significant, as some would put it a 500% reduction, detail will be lost just because it drops below being 2 pixels wide.

    I did my processing in Photoshop, Elements may have worked, but layers and masks were necessary. I first simplified the sky by running a denoise filter, this results in less unique data is required to define it in the final image so more data can be give to the aircraft. Next I applied a very high Amount of a very low Radius sharpening to just the aircraft. Then I reduced the opacity of the sharpening to where it looked good. I added fine contrast and adjusted the light a touch to make up for the loss due to compression.

    The effort is probably not worth it for a small image like this, but it was an interesting exercise.

    29498397050_d7d81ea5d6_o(mbedit4).jpg
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2016
    yasser likes this.
  8. yasser

    yasser Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    359
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    MikeB, Thank you for reply and your time and effort on this. Your image is far sharper than I achieved on here. Your second paragraph did make sense to me and I was able to follow it but the first just went over my head, something else I'll have to understand. I did try it in elements but I found I didn't have the control I did in lightroom. Once again Thanks
     
  9. DonS

    DonS Stuck in Toronto Moderator

    Messages:
    8,894
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    To be honest, I cannot see a difference in any of these shots. I am at work on my work laptop but they all look identical in quality.
     
  10. MikeB

    MikeB Old Hand Premium Member

    Messages:
    11,333
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    It is a challenge as we get older, Don. :)
     
  11. DonS

    DonS Stuck in Toronto Moderator

    Messages:
    8,894
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    Really, I cannot see a change. I do not wear reading glasses and aside from the screen being small (15.6 inch) nothing else is wrong.
     
  12. MikeB

    MikeB Old Hand Premium Member

    Messages:
    11,333
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    Fair enough. Here's a direct compare that may help. I did say that the improvement in image quality would only be a little. There is additional detail in the edited/sharpened image not found in the one edited by Lightroom (the original). While Lightroom does a fine job, there is just far more flexibility provided by Photoshop. I am fond of the term marginal as it directly relates to the cost differences in cameras and lenses. Marginal quality improvements often come at a disproportional cost difference, in this case in software and time. If image quality is something that drives you then this may be useful information, if not or you have a monitor that can not itself resolve the detail then it is of no matter.

    It is probably not worth time and energy to do this for an image on a web page, but if you are printing you would want the highest image quality you can afford.

    f15(original).jpg Original
    mbsharpened.jpg Additional Edit and Sharpen
     
  13. DonS

    DonS Stuck in Toronto Moderator

    Messages:
    8,894
    Edit my images ?:
    Yes (recommended)
    That I can see a little difference. Yes, for web not worth the effort but for print it certainly is.
     

Share This Page