Cropping workflow?

Any suggestions for isolating content in a document, so that it can be saved by itself?
Sure, there is crop, but that cuts the whole image down, and if you accidentally save the document.... then you may have lost a lot of work. Sort of dangerous.
I usually duplicate the folder in the layers panel, then turn it into a smart object and open that object to save... are there any other time saving ways of cropping a part of the document to save that section as an image?

Which version of Photoshop are you using.  In CS6 they changed the crop tool quite a bit, and there's a checkbox that says "Delete Cropped Pixels".  If you uncheck that then you can crop the photo, and any jpgs or whatnot you save from that file will be cropped.  But you can go back into the crop tool at any time and recrop and all your data is still there.  Just keep in mind that certain modifications you do after the crop will often only affect the cropped area.

Similar Messages

  • ACR 8.1 beta Crop/Workflow Options change is inconvenient

    I generally leave the ACR Workflow Options resolution set to default, and in the past have set the crop tool to a smaller pixel resolution, such as 1024x768.  I could then either run the image straight thru to Photoshop at full resolution, or apply a crop and save directly from ACR for proof/email lower resolution versions.
    However it appears that in 8.1 the crop tool no longer has a pixel setting, now I have to set the resolution in the workflow options in order to save out a proof/email image.  If I want to run the full resolution image thru to Photoshop I have to click on the Workflow Options link and disable the resolution setting.  So I can't switch back and forth without changing workflow options, which requires more clicks, and is easy to forget; Is there a way to save multiple workflow options settings and select among them?  Such has been requested for a long time, but apparently is still not available.
    Richard Southworth
    Added by edit - the new item in the Workflow Options is a Resize to Fit section, which can be enabled/disabled with a check box.  Is there a shortcut key to toggle, something quicker than going thru the link at the bottom?

    I'm in the process of going through 1100+ images from a recent vacation, selecting and re-sizing for transfer to an iPad.  Actually the new arrangement is working out ok, I'm adjusting and cropping on the originals, then going back and doing a multiple save out at the desired resolution.  Most of my images are un-cropped, so this new configuration saves a lot of full frame cropping.
    As long as I remember to disable the resize before moving images to Photoshop all is ok, even preferable.  Sorry I complained, nothing like using a tool to understand the pros and cons.
    Richard Southworth

  • Workflow for cropping video from UHD to full HD

    I have some GoPro 4K (3840x2160) UHD video that I wish to crop to full HD (1920x1080) using Premiere Pro CC 2014.2.  My aim is to incorporate the cropped video into a project that contains nothing but full HD video.  I’m aware that cropping is throwing away a lot of the original video information, but that’s’ exactly what I want.
    I’m not sure how to go about doing this.  For example, prior to cropping, do I create a sequence that matches the original GoPro 4K footage and place the GoPro video in that sequence, or create a sequence that is equal to the finished video resolution (in my case 1920x1080) and place the original GoPro video in there?
    I’d also like to know how best to use the warp stabilizer effect in conjunction with the cropping. Should I warp stabilize the 4K video and then crop, stabilize the cropped video (which would introduce some scaling), or maybe crop to some intermediate resolution, and warp stabilize that first (I’m thinking this may reduce processing time)?
    I've never attempted cropping before, so I’d really appreciate if someone could give me an idea on the workflow for cropping and stabilizing, or any tips to get me started.
    Thanks in advance,
    Steve

    I think I’ve managed to achieve what I’m after.  As you quite rightly say, I need a nested sequence.  What I’ve done is create the sequence at full 3840x2160 resolution.  I’ve then set the crop size to 50% (which gives me my intended output resolution of 1920x1080).  At this point, I'm actually working on only 1/4 of the original frame.  I have my little crop box floating around in a sea of black in the context of how much of the original frame I'm intending to discard.
    I’ve then keyframed the crop to allow me to move it around and follow the action within the video that I want to focus on.
    After that, I enable the zoom option within crop effects settings, and finally, export the video at 1920x1080.
    As far as I can ascertain, I’ve ended up with a 1920x1080 resolution video cropped out of the 3840x2160, and because I started with such a high resolution video to begin with, the part I’ve actually wanted to keep is at full HD with no loss of quality.
    I now need to figure out how to apply warp stabilization for best results.  I have a number of ideas on this but need to experiment to see how it turns out.
    Steve

  • Workflow  / Aspect Ratio / Cropping

    Hi all,
    I have about 200 images that I need to crop 5inch x 7inch, then to change the aspect ratio to D1/DV PAL 1.07. But what order do I need to carry out the work? Aspect Ratio or cropping first? Or does it make no difference?
    Thank you

    deakant wrote:
    Hi all,
    I have about 200 images that I need to crop 5inch x 7inch, then to change the aspect ratio to D1/DV PAL 1.07. But what order do I need to carry out the work? Aspect Ratio or cropping first? Or does it make no difference?
    Thank you
    PAL (Phase Alternating Line)
    This format is used particularly in Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand and in some areas of Asia. PAL uses altogether 625 scan lines, thereof approx. 575 are visible. The color subcarrier has a frequency of approx. 4.43 MHz in the case of analog PAL (complementary view). Special NTSC or PAL color subcarrier signals will not be transferred via connections like SCART (RGB) and YUV. Such a signal is only transferred via connections like Composite Video, RCA, FBAS and Y/C or S-Video (S-VHS) respectively. The refresh rate is 25 Hz or 25 fps respectively. This corresponds to 50 Hz (interlaced) or 50 fields/s respectively. The digital standard resolution is 720x576 pixel for DVDs, 480x576 pixel for SVCDs and 352x288 pixel for VCDs.
    The digital standard resolution is 720x576 pixel for DVDs to me that is  5:4 sapect ratio where NTSC has a 4:3 aspect ratio.  Why doyou want to do a 7:5  aspect ratio crop.

  • Lightroom Bug: with GoPro Hero4 Silver Lens Profile, crop settings do not sync properly in Lightroom 5.7.1 when Constrain To Warp is checked

    I was having a bit of difficultly in getting crop settings to properly sync in Lightroom 5.7.1 (running on OS X 10.10.1) when Constrain to Warp was checked.  This appears to be a bug in the latest version(s) of Lightroom that include(s) the GoPro Hero4 Silver Lens Profile settings.  I'm working with a lot of files from a GoPro Hero4 Silver camera shot in the time-lapse / interval timer mode.  All of them are horizontal with the same resolution (and dimensions).  I've tried various sequences to get this to work in terms of using Auto-Sync, resetting the settings on all images except one and then copy and pasting settings, etc, though the crop is not properly syncing regardless of what I do.
    Here's are instructions of how to duplicate this issue (there are some extra details/steps here, though this should be clear enough to produce the same result):
         1.  in the Develop settings for a single selected image, go to Lens Corrections, click to Enable Profile Corrections (in the Profile tab), and then pick the GoPro Hero4 Silver Edition (Adobe Profile) if it is not automatically chosen for you (if you are using files from a Hero4 Silver camera).  After this, click on the Manual tab, and set the Scale setting to 76.  (as you will see, you now have the full horizontal width of the image that was getting cropped off, though you do see white around the edges that have been warped/shaped to correct the fisheye distortion)
         2.  Press the R key (or click on the Crop Overlay tool just below the histogram).  Change the Aspect option to Custom.  Click to unlock the lock next to it (this seems to re-lock after setting to custom even if it was locked before).  Place a checkmark next to the Constrain To Warp option.  (At this point, you'll see the image gets cropped back to an approximately 4:3 ratio and the full horizontal width is not included in the cropped area)  Click the upper right most corner of the crop area and drag as much to the right and top as it lets you go.  Do the same for the lower left corner, dragging it as far to the bottom left as you can go.  (Now, you will see that your cropped area is the maximum rectangular width and height you can select without getting any of the excessive white area)  Click the Close button (or press R again) to leave the crop overlay tool.
         3.  Press G to go back to the grid of images.  Make sure the image you just adjusted the settings for is the only one selected.  Right click on it, go to Develop Settings, and click Copy Settings.  Click Check All on the window that appears and then click Copy.
         4.  De-select the image you were working on.  Select multiple other images in the grid.  Right click on one of these, go to Develop Settings, and click Paste Settings.  (at this point, you will see their aspect ratio has become more panoramic than the 4:3 aspect ratio the images previously were)
         5.  De-select these images.  Select one of these image, and then press D to go to the Develop settings for this image.  Press R to go to the Crop Overlay tool.  Here you will see the bug where the crop was not properly copied over from the first image.  The selected area is smaller than the full width and height available to crop.
    It seems that the bug is that Lightroom is only copying the aspect ratio (and the other settings), but not the actual crop selection.
    I just thought of a workaround that I've tested and can confirm works (and will also work in a slightly different workflow than above).  In step 1 above, for the Model (and Profile), manually pick the "GoPro Hero4 Black Edition" or the "GoPro Hero3-Silver Edition".  If using the "Hero3-Silver" setting, the Scale (also in step 1 above) need only be set to 79 (rather than 76 for the Hero4 profiles).  By picking one of these Lens Profiles and doing everything else the same as the other steps above, the crop settings do copy and paste properly.  This does also appear to work properly when selecting the "GoPro Hero3-White Edition" Lens Profile, with a Scale setting of 75, which yields a slightly more rectilinear image (with a wider aspect ratio -- almost, but not quite 16:9).
    While this isn't too big of deal as it does work by picking one of the other lens profiles (and the Hero4 Black Edition profile appears to make the same exact correction to the image), this was incredibly frustrating last night to notice that some files had the proper horizontal field of view / crop and others didn't, and other users may experience this or not even notice their crop is not copied properly (as, depending on one's composition and image, it's not extremely obvious with such a wide view).
    I hope this discovery helps someone else and provides feedback for Adobe to correct this issue in the next version of Lightroom 5.
    On a separate, additional note for Adobe:  Please allow the crop overlay tool to "crop" an image to a size that is larger than the original dimensions of the image.  This would allow for one to retain maximum original sharpness in the center of the image when using the Lens Profile tool to correct, or "de-fish" a lens, without having to scale the image down with the Scale option on the Manual tab of the Lens Corrections settings.  For example, when I do the above process selecting the Hero3-White Edition profile, my final image dimensions are 3840 by 2257 pixels, reducing the size of the image in the center by 25%.  If the tool allowed one to crop/scale a larger image size, and I kept the Scale option of the Lens Corrections settings at 100 rather than 75, my final image dimensions would be 5120 by 3009 pixels (larger than the 4000 by 3000 pixel dimensions of the original image which the tool now limits me to).  Yes, the edges would be a little softer but the center would retain the original detail.  (this is essentially what the Calculate Optimal Size button found in the Hugin open source software does, when using it on a single image for lens transformations/corrections)

    Can you zip up a few of your GoPro images, upload them to dropbox.com and post a share link, here, so others can experiment with them, or do you mean this issue is global to all camera models?

  • Large Still Images into PE - One Workflow

    Everyone wants the highest quality that they can obtain when doing their videos. It’s natural to want the best. Well, when dealing with still images, bigger is not necessarily better, for two reasons. First, overly large still images can really tax a system and second, one is limited to the frame size of the video, so these have to be resized somewhere - this resizing can be in the NLE (Non Linear Editor) program, or in an image processing program like PS (Photoshop), which does a better job anyway. Doing this in PS, or PSE, will result in better resized images, and they are easier for the NLE to work with. Quality is as high as your Project’s Preset will allow, and you are more efficient, with fewer crashes, slowdowns and hangs. It is a win-win situation.
    Here is my normal workflow when dealing with still images. This workflow is for NTSC 4:3 720x480 with a PAR (Pixel Aspect Ratio) of 0.9. If your Project’s Presets are different, use those specs to resize to.
    Since I shoot my still images in RAW, I Copy my files from the CF card to my system and catalog these images by location, subject and date (if necessary). I’ll do a quick conversion and Save_As Adobe DNG for backup. I then process these RAW images in PS with the ARC (Adobe Raw Converter), correcting them and then doing a Save_As PSD into a sub-folder. All of this is in my still photo library.
    Normally, I will edit these PSD’s to find the images that I wish to use in a Video Project, and will Copy the selected images to another folder. You’ll see that I work with a lot of Copies, so my original files are always untouched and stored elsewhere. This guards against anything happening to them.
    At this point, I’ll decide how I wish to use these selected images in my Video Project. Let’s just say that they are all horizontal images, and are still full-size from my camera. As stated, my Video Projects are DV-NTSC 4:3 720x480 PAR 0.9. [Remember, your Video Project may vary, so you will need to plug in the dimensions for YOUR Video Project in that case.] I also will have done my Cropping on each image individually, to get them to 4:3 Aspect Ratio. I do this my eye and by hand, rather than via an Action, because I want full aesthetic control.
    In PS, I have a set of Actions for Video. An Action is like a Script, but less powerful and less involved in the writing. As I have already done all of my image enhancements and additional processing before I did my Copy to the selected folder, I only have to worry about my Action resizing these selected images for use in my Video Project. My Action here is to resize to 720x480 with a PAR of 0.9, and I normally use the Action that does this with a particular resizing algorithm, Bicubic-Smoother (though I also use Bicubic-Sharper on occasion).
    For the next step, I go to my folder structure (remember, this folder contains copies of my selected still images in PSD format), and create a new sub-folder "[Project Name]_720x480." Back in PS, I choose File>Automate>Batch. Here I set my Source Folder, my Destination folder and the Action to perform. In my case, it’ll be the Destination Folder, that I just created, [Project Name]_720x480, and my Action will be my NTSC 4:3 720x480 Smooth. I check to have the Open command by-passed, because I do not need to see this take place on my monitor. When I hit OK, PS grabs all files in my Source Folder, runs the commands of my Action and does a Save_As for all files into my Destination Folder. I can process hundreds of large images down to a great 720x480 PAR 0.9 via Bicubic-Smoother interpolation, in moments. Now, I’m ready to go. Last, I Copy my Destination Folder to my Video Project’s folder hierarchy (usually on another HDD), and then Import these processed stills into my NLE.
    What if I need to pan on one, or more of these images, while they are zoomed out completely? I don’t have enough pixels in my horizontal dimension to do this. I am just filling the frame with my still. Well, if I find that there are such images, I go back to my folder with the full sized images in my still images library, and select the ones that need to be larger. I run another Action on these, but it’s one that resizes to something larger than 720x480, say 1000x750. Now, I have another Destination Folder with the name [File Name]_1000x750. I’ll Copy this over to my Video Project, and Import these into the NLE. Here, I can go to Project Panel and remove the 720x480 versions if I so choose, but since a Premiere Project file (.PRPROJ or .PREL) is only an XML database, I may just leave them. It does not contain any media files, just links to where they are on the system and to what operations are performed on them.
    By doing my resizing in PS, rather than in Premiere, I have accomplished two things:
    1.) I have better quality resized images, using the algorithms in PS, plus have a choice of several interpolation methods to work with.
    2.) I have lessened the processing load on my NLE and on my system, while doing the editing
    I get higher quality and lower resource overhead - hence my reference to "win-win."
    Now, back to my aesthetic control. I do not do any automatic zooming or panning. If one allows the NLE to do this, then they will want to probably process all of their images to 1000x750 (remember, this is for an NTSC 4:3 Project, so you will need to calculate what YOUR Project will require).
    The two programs that I use are Photoshop and Premiere Pro, but Photoshop Elements can do the same things, though the exact commands might be different. Premiere Elements will handle the resized still images, just like Premiere Pro and the only difference will be the terminology used when one wishes to Import the still images.
    I also keep all of my images in .PSD (the native format of PS), and do not convert to JPEG, or other. If one’s camera shoots only JPEG, I suggest writing the Action to do the Save_As to .PSD, as another JPEG compression will cost one quality. Yes, the JPEG’s will be smaller, but remember we are looking for the ultimate quality, so larger file sizes are just part of that equation.
    One does not have to deal with all of the Copies, as I do. However, this allows me to go back to the originals, or to the processed full-sized .PSD’s at any step along the way. There is only one thing worse than not being able to go back to an intermediate version with full Layers and Adjustment Layers, plus any Alpha Channels, and that is finding out that you’ve lost your original RAW and DNG backups! That’s why I do a lot of Save_As and also work from Copies all along the way.
    Hunt

    Your workflow looks good. I do similar, but use PS, in lieu of LightRoom. I also do DNG's for my archives.
    Provided that one chooses a JPEG compression algorithm setting that does not do too much compression, I doubt that anyone, but the most very critical, could tell the difference in Video. Most of my tests on PSD vs JPEG have been for print. There, one can more easily detect the differences. Video "hides" some of that.
    To date, I have not had a Project where the Asset size differences between equally sized PSD's vs JPEG's caused any slowdown, or problem. There could be a resources savings with the smaller JPEG files, but there is a tiny bit of overhead dealing with the JPEG compression. I have never tested this, so can only guess that the smaller Asset size of the JPEG would trump that overhead - just a guess on my part.
    For me, keeping the images in PSD does save a tiny bit of work in my Action (basically one less operation to perform), but I doubt that one could measure that time difference, even over the automation of hundreds of images. Besides, it's only one additional line in the Action. My feelings on JPEG vs PSD is firmly based in my print experience, and I am probably being too critical with images going to video. When I move up to HD and BD authoring, I need to apply a very critical eye, to see if I can tell the differences on an HD TV. So long as one does not apply too much JPEG compression, the differences should be very slight, at the worst, and maybe not even noticed, at best.
    I do minimize the impact of many files on my Project by sizing to what I need. If I will not be doing any pans on zoomed-out images, I size to my Project. For pans on zoomed-out images, I calculate just what I will need for those pans, and might end up with several groups of sizes, to accommodate each. Still, the vast majority will be sized to exactly what I need for the Project - very few extra pixels.
    In my case, and yours too, I have my RAW, my DNG, my working Layered PSD's, and then my sized output. I always keep all working PSD's, as I might change my mind, or my client might change theirs, and I do not want to have to go back and redo work, if I still have those working files. I also do as little destructive editing, as I can, using Dupe Layers, and Adjustment Layers, whenever possible. If I can, I never Flatten, or Merge Layers, so I can make any/all changes at any time, and only have to do the resizing via the same Actions. That is basically a "one-button" solution, once I have made the changes required.
    Good luck,
    Hunt

  • Scan in mutiple photos in one file, can I crop multiple photos...

    at same time?
    I don't know how to scan multiple photos as distinct file. I scan 5-6 pics it comes out at one file that I import into iPhoto. While it's very easy to crop each photo out of the file, I have to import the file as many times as there are photos
    to crop.
    I hope I've been clear. Is there a smarter way to work. I don't see a way to scan
    the 5-6 pics as different files in my scanner software.
    Thanks

    Joshua:
    Vuescan is a 3rd party scanning application which can do batch scanning but is a little more difficult to set up. It works with most scanners.
    If you have a Canon scanner you can scan in multiple photos at one time and have the scanner software crop, not as close as I'd like, each one individually and present to you in the editor of your choice or the one that comes with it.
    Do you Twango?
    TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
    I've written an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.

  • How do I create multiple crop outputs from ACR?

    In CS5.5 my workflow involved selecting a number of RAW files and opening in ACR. I could make corrections as required, but also apply individual crops to each image. For instance, twenty might be set to 10"x8", another ten to 15"x12" and thirty to 8"x6". When I then clicked done. I could run image processor on the files and point to a hotfolder on the network which was watched by the RIP running the printer. The RIP could then pick up the files, composite them, and start the print queue. it was a hugely efficient system.
    That now seems to have been given the kiss of death because the crop tool in ACR no longer offers any option other than a ratio. My understanding from these forums is that output size is now governed by the workflow options dialogue box. But the problem with that is that it applies the same output size to every image selected, not to mention the fact that instead of opening one dialogue box (namely the custom crop tool), I now need to open two.
    I am at a loss to see how this is a more efficient system. Please give us back the facility to set custom crops with different output sizes, or failing that, can someone explain to me how I now do what I was doing without having to do twice as much work? Otherwise I may as well cancel my CC subscription and go back to 5.5

    Are all the file specs that you set up in Image Processor available in the Save Image button in ACR?
    If so, your steps could look like this:
    With Crop tool, set image to correct proportions.
    In Workflow Options, choose preset you made for 10x8.
    Click Save Image button, choose preset you made for format/file specs, click Save.
    While that is processing in the background, repeat steps 2-3 for the next two image dimensions. The odd one is the 8x6 dimension because it doesn't match the proportions of the first two, so for that one you'd have to go back to step 1.
    If you can accomplish your entire workflow in Camera Raw, and if I haven't misunderstood what you need, this could end up being a more efficient workflow overall by saving the trip out to Image Processor.
    Of course, this assumes you've set up presets (a relatively new ACR feature) for your standard dimensions and file specs so that you can keep the number of clicks to a minimum.

  • Can i make a book in iPhoto without using any of the built in layout templates, which are too limiting when i have already cropped my pictures to show just what I want. Ideally I just want to drag and drop and arrange and size the pictures myself

    Can i make a book in iPhoto without using any of the built in layout templates, which are too limiting when i have already cropped my pictures to show just what I want. Ideally I just want to drag and drop and arrange and size the pictures myself

    If you have Pages you can create customs pages for your book as TD suggested. If you have Pages from iWork 09 or 11 this app will add 80 or so additional frames to those offered:  Frames and Strokes Installer. Don't use it on the latest Pages version, however.
    This tutorial shows how to create a custom page with the theme's background: iP11 - Creating a Custom Page, with the Theme's Background for an iPhoto Book.  Once the page is complete to get it into iPhoto as a jpeg file follow these steps:
    Here's how to get any file into iPhoto as a jpeg file:
    1 - open the file in any application that will open it.
    2 - type Command+P to start the print process.
    3  - click on the PDF button and select "Save PDF to iPhoto".
    NOTE:  If you don't have any of those options go to Toad's Cellar and download these two files:
    Save PDF to iPhoto 200 DPI.workflow.zip
    Save PDF to iPhoto 300 DPI.workflow.zip
    Unzip the files and place in the HD/Library/PDF Services folder and reboot.
    4 - select either of the files above (300 dip is used for photos to be included in a book that will be ordered).
    5 - in the window that comes up enter an album name or select an existing album and hit the Continue button.
    That will create a 200 or 300 dpi jpeg file of the item being printed and import it into iPhoto. For books to be printed choose 300 dpi.

  • What is the best workflow for Ultimate Sharpening w PSE 8?

    I shoot a lot of flowers close up and also birds. Both have lots of detail, feathers or stamen, so I rely heavily on sharpening. With birds, sometimes they are flying or distant or both which makes it challenging to get the pics sharp. Recently I have learned more about sharpening and now I am suffering from, "The more I know, the more I know I don't know." Also, some of my information is based on rumor and I would really appreciate any advice. How about if I discuss my workflow and ask some questions here and there.
    I shoot RAW with a Canon 7D and I almost always downsize my pics to nnnn x 1080 for this conversation, lets assume I always do this downsizing. I've heard that downsized pics should never be sharpened until after they are downsized. Is this true? Should I set all of the ACR sharpening sliders to zero? Should I also keep the Clarity slider low in ACR or is it more mid-tone contrast and less sharpening? Is there another way to improve Clarity in PSE, not ACR?
    When I am done with ACR and open in Elements, the first thing I do is crop and resize using Image, Resize, Bicubic Sharper. Then I fix blemishes. Next I select out the subject(s) and adjust with Color Curves and then Luminous Sharpening which seems to give me better results than Enhance- Adjust Sharpness. (After two years of using Elements I just found this Luminous sharpening and it is so good. I sure wish I would have notice that in Brundage's book earlier. I makes me wonder what else I am missing.) After the Luminous Sharpening should I try High Pass sharpening additionally or any other kind of sharpening? Are there any rules of thumb on when what type of sharpening works best in which application? For example, I heard another rumor that sharpening highlights or dark shadows just increases noise. Is there a good way to handle those situations, like select them out or use a special blend mode?
    After I am done with the subject, I usually inverse to the background and de-noise and/or blurr and desaturate to punch up the subject.
    Is full Photoshop required to get the best sharpening tools or is the sharpening similar and other aspects are more powerful? I use so little of Elements 8 that I would assume and hope that Photoshop or Lightroom would be overkill at this point.
    Thank you for reviewing this! If you can think of any way I could improve I would really appreciate any comments.
    Doug

    Hi Barbara,
    I am humbled to be communicating with someone who wrote such and incredible book! Ok, enough blathering.
    This will also answer Andrewzaye's question about output.
    Maybe I shouldn't be resampling but here is my rationale. Most of my best pics I like to show occasionally on my HTDV which has a resolution of 1920x 1080. I resample my pics to get them down to that 1080 vertical resolution so that they will fit the native resolution of the screen. (The sides often don't extend the full 1920 but I don't have a problem with the black space on the sides.) This is based on my believe that images on LCDs look best at the LCDs native resolution (and I like to think I know about this because, as a sales mgr for Toshiba, I used to sell notebook computer LCDs by the tens of thousands to big computer companies.) Sometimes I resample and downsize again to email pics as n x 680. It seems to work fine with decent results but I am certainly open to suggestion.
    If I eventually decide to print out a photo, it will be to hang on a wall and for that I save the original CR2 file and the post ACR dng files. If I like something enough to print it, I don't mind editing it again and making sure I am getting it as good as possible. Of course I would keep as much resolution as possible for printing.
    Ok, those are my excuses. I would love to hear your thoughts on my sharpening questions.
    Doug

  • Workflow sd letterbox to 16:9 hd through iohd?

    Hi.  Let me preface this with saying I've waited three years to be able to do the following workflow to get a hardware upres of my feature film affordably as using a teranex etc. was out of reach for me and I didn't want to throw my money away on editing houses when I preferred to acquire equipment and do this on my own...first I lucked out with getting an iohd on ebay, and then someone at b&h kindly told me about the ninja that had been invented and that I signed up and patiently waited for production on...this week I got a secondhand hdv recorder so now I'm ready to go.  I was told along the way that I couldn't do this without a lot of money or a software alternative upres that wasn't acceptable for me...and I came up with this workflow but I have one last bug I'm wondering if any of you out there can help me with!
    The original film was shot on a dvx100 in 4:3 and letterboxed.  The file that I edited, and later could see output through my iohd to hd image on my flat screen as one of my monitors...I now plan to capture on the ninja as a pro res 422 hq file that I'll then throw back on fcp for preparation for hd files, one of which I'll output to an hvr-m15au as hdv1080i or 720p!
    I have prepared various files and realized the ninja recognized the files uncompressed at 8 and 10 bit and not in rgb (?) when output from the iohd through hdmi...so I have ready uncompressed letterbox and uncompressed anamorphic set-up for digibeta or just 720x480 rather than 720x486...but I've decided on choosing the file I had ready for digibeta which seems to match the specs closer for hd.
    The aja output is in 1080i 29.97 (for some reason the ninja only recognizes the signal as 59.97) and/or 720p 59.97. 
    But HERE'S MY QUESTION! 
    I get, of course a full screen capture of my anamorphic file that can then be recognized on the digital tv as 16:9 if I choose a "full" setting...is this the best solution considering the original source if I want to have at the end a full 16:9 picture onscreen...or is there a way to do all this and have a true 16:9 and at what point in the workflow would I do this "cropping" and if I do that am I back to square one with deterioration of image??????  I do have broadcast opportunities down the road with a distributor who is still pitching my film in its sd format and as well...I'd like to also fiddle around with blu-ray authoring on my own once I capture these files.
    I'm also a little perplexed as to why I'm not seeing the stretched files on the ninja monitor out of the iohd when I choose the stretch options in the iohd which would solve the problem but that's not what's happening.
    Thank you for your input or multiple suggestions on this...and for the naysayers out there who have said "why bother upresing at all"...you'd have to see the finished film output as hd on a monitor to know that answer and to recognize the reality that people will choose download or buying hd product or blu-ray, not to mention the broadcasters who want deliverables for some platforms on hdcam or other hd formats...and love of full screen ability of picture...the iohd is a wonderful tool that, before I owned it, I didn't think I could ever afford to have an upres of my film that would be acceptable...so now the green pasture is in sight and I'd appreciate any last suggestions on this last question as to the best workflow to get the finished picture to open 16:9 without it being anamorphic or if this is not a wise solution...if indeed there's such a thing as hd anamorphic as acceptable for broadcast which I think isn't the case (though I'm aware worse comes to worse the hd letterbox is probably ok but I still want to know how to do this).
    Thank you!!!!!!!!!!  Apple boards has helped me through the technical crazies and appreciate all input I get which has helped me learn and do things I never thought I could do or that others have said I can't do that I've accomplished with this simple footage...in any case HELP once I get through all of this I'll be moving completely away from SD and will never deal with this stuff again...(except of course with my other "legacy footage" arghhhh).

    OK I did one pass and recorded a file on the ninja that was uncompressed anamorphic wide...but apparently I guess I was doing something wrong  with my iohd before because going back...I was able to take the uncompressed 4:3 letterbox and this time the iohd indeed output the file as a zoom wide which now appears like it was a little stretched vertically but not very noticeable but then I decided maybe it would look better using the anamorphic digibeta file because of the lines being 720x486 out and indeed I was able to do this as a full 16:9 output this time with it set to down anamorphic up zoom letterbox on the iohd and it appears this did the trick as it's exact matching proportions I see on my ntsc monitor...
    Anyway, am I doing this right?  It appears now I've succeeded in making a full 16:9  file as a pro res 422 hq 1080i file from a 720x486 uncompressed 10 bit anamorphic fcp file that was created from what started as a letterbox 4:3 ntsc dvcam rgb file that was dropped into an anamorphic timeline.
    I'll report how it looks once it's back in fcp on my large screen tv and after I output it to the hdv recorder.

  • Best workflow practices for iBooks Author re Enhanced Books?

    Hi
    I have already published one Enhanced iBook in iTunes (The Wandering Gorillas) about my research in Rwanda.  I am now working on several others which will contain much more interactive media - photos and video.
    I have vast amounts of unique photos and video - which would be useful for education purposes. So, 'where fools rush in...' I began to creat a new Enhanced iBook with lots of rich media.
    However, I immediately started to have serious problems as the fille sizes grew very large - due to the many images and especially because iBooks Author creates versions etc.  Thanks to solutions provided on another post by Pondini & Linc Davis these problems have now been resolved and I have regained my 'lost' 100 GB - which had been gobbled up into the folder DocumentREvisions and private/var - you can read their solutions here
    https://discussions.apple.com/message/22800295#22800295
    Now, I wish to avoid the same problems - and try to get the best possible workflow to use when creating Enhanced iBooks - which contain lots of rich media files such as photos and video.
    And so I am asking advice form anyone who has created such iBooks using iBooks author - or who is an expert in the finer workings of this software.
    First -  Since Apple restrict the final iBook size to 2 Gb (and recommen smaller) I am considering creating my new iBook via separetly published chapters - so that each will be less than the max 2GB.  Obvioulsy these will have to have some 'stand alone' usefulness!
    But, is this a good practice? has anyone done this? Is there any way for the separate chapters to be later combined - by the user - in order to have a complete, coherent book?
    Second, re image file sizes.  For best quality on their new Retina Display iPads Apple suggest images of (No larger than ) 5000 x 5000.  I used this - and it produced image file sizes of 20 -30 MB.  I did some other trials - using images of 1024 x 1024 max - and on my iPad 2 (non Retina) my failing eyes could not see any difference?  Their file size was reduced to 2- 300 KB
    Would the difference be  obvious on a Retina Display though?  Should we use the largest possible resolution (and file size) - but this has serious implications for the eventual overall iBook file size.
    What is the best compromise?
    Third,   I have an iMac with an i7 250 Gb Flash drive and a separate 1TB hard drive.  All my 'media assets' are on the 1TB hard drive. The still images are exported from my various Aperture libraries - as jpegs of the size mentioned above (and into a newly created folder) .  Same with video - to Apple's recommendations for video replay on iPads.
    So far I have kept and used the actual iBook Author file - for the new book - on the desktop of my 250GB i7 Flash Drive.
    But, as I reported in the other post, this soon caused me huge problems as my disk space was rapidly 'eaten up' by duplicate versions etc.
    I am now considering using a separate, 1Tb Firewire External drive for the actual iBook Author file (with backup copies onto another 1TB drive) I am certain this will be slower than using my internal flash drive - but is this 'good practice?'  Can it avoid the problems of all 'lost' storage space which caused me such hassles when using my flash drive?  Or, will this be minimised if I create separate iBooks from separate chapters?
    And, delete uneccessary versions of course!
    I do feel that this is an emerging issue which many will face - as we incorporate more and more rich media into our iBooks.
    Any help or suggestions are gratefull received!

    Thunderstorm played havoc with box from my ISP - and I am ruuning on a reserve and internet access flaky!
    but, here goes with one reply.  Will have to wait later re tests for your other suggestions when weather calmed down
    Re   'as Apple suggessted'   I should have said - no larger than 5000 x 5000 pixels (the 3240 was my vertical proportional dimension from choosing 5000 horizintal dimension)
    this is from Ibooks Author help
    Add and edit photos and other images
    You can add a photo or other image (in a supported file type) to a page in your book by dragging the photo from theMedia Browser, the Finder, or another application.
    After adding a photo to your book and positioning it on the page, you can use the tools in iBooks Author to mask (crop) the photo; change its brightness, contrast, and other image qualities; or erase its background.
    Important:  When you export your book for distribution outside the iBookstore, images are automatically scaled to a width of 2048 pixels, which is optimized for iPad with Retina display. Readers can view these images on other iPad models, but the viewing experience might be slower. You can improve the viewing experience on iPad models without Retina display by using images no wider than 1024 pixels.
    ShowMask (crop) a photo
    ShowChange a photo’s brightness, contrast, and other settings
    ShowRemove the background or unwanted elements from a photo
    Important:  Images can’t be larger than 25 megapixels (5000 x 5000 pixels) or 50 MB.
    SEE ALSO
    Add an accessibility description to an object 
    Add a title, label, or caption to an object
    Was this page helpful?Send feedback.
    Copyright © 2012 Apple Inc. All rights reserved.

  • New to Mac: help me adjust my Windows workflow to iPhoto

    I recently switched to Mac, mostly in the hopes of spending less time thinking about how the computer works and more time doing what I want to do.
    In fact, what made me finally start seriously thinking about a Mac is when I heard about the iPhoto '08 events feature, where it automatically split the photos based on the dates. I thought that was genius in how simple, yet effective it was.
    I take quite a few photos. I take a lot of random photos of my car (I'm a car guy), but I also take some photos at parties, friend visits and family visits, etc. I often take several of photos of the same thing, because, heck, there's plenty of space on the memory card, and maybe one of the subsequent photos will be better than the first.
    One common scenario for me is going to a social gathering of some kind and then posting the photos of that event online.
    My Windows XP workflow used to be as follows:
    1. Connect camera
    2. Import photos into a folder named after the event using Windows Photo import. If several different events, select several sets and import them separately into separate folders. E.g. "My Pictures\Spring Cleaning Day Apr 2008"
    3. Browse the photos using Windows File Viewer and delete any obviously poor photos and select the least blurry of several duplicates.
    So that above is fairly straighforward. Now, I need to get these photos up online. A while back, I set up for myself a website that runs Gallery 1.x software, so I could just upload photos via a web interface and have them viewable with automatic thumbnails.
    The thing is: I don't want to upload ALL images online. Just most of them (the best).
    4. Open the photos I'm interested in a photo editor, one by one.
    5. Crop, adjust levels, shadows, colors, etc.
    6. Resize photo to a "large but not too large" web size, usually either 1200 or 1400 pixels wide.
    7. Adjust sharpness on the resized photo to make sure it looks good when viewed at actual pixel size.
    8. Save photo in a subfolder called "forweb", e.g. My Pictures\Spring Cleaning Day Apr 2008\forweb. This way, I get to keep all the originals from the camera and my resized web-ready photos separate.
    9. Upload all photos from the "forweb" folder using a web interface, typing up descriptions for each.
    When I'm done, I have a gallery that has thumbnails, mid-size versions of the photos (800 pixels wide, for easy viewing) and a "full-size" version for a detailed view (but not as huge as the one that came out of the camera... so it's not original size). In fact, the original size photos are huge (as I take them at 7.1MP resolution with the lowest compression), about 2-3MB each, and so I'd never want to upload a 100 3MB photos. A waste of space.
    Overall, the result is pretty good: most people view the midsize photos and save full-size (1200 or 1400 pix wide) photos of things they particularly like.
    However, the process is too time consuming. In particular, it takes forever to go through each photo and resize it and crop it. The process of resizing and saving each individual photo in the separate "forweb" is quite a bit of overhead. Sometimes I kind of dread having to post photos up online after events, and it should totally not be that way!
    I bought a .Mac subscription after seeing the fancy web galleries. I am hoping that the combination of iPhoto and .Mac can help me get my photos up on the web quicker.
    So now, the iPhoto workflow. What should it be?
    Here's my guess:
    1. Connect camera.
    2. Import all photos, naming each event after importing.
    3. Delete poor photos or blurry duplicates.
    4. Identify photos I want to display on the gallery (those worth keeping) and hide all others.
    5. Crop and adjust shadows/colors/etc.
    6. Select "Web gallery" to share the event.
    And then I'm done.
    So that sounds pretty good right there. Except, I have several reservations and questions:
    1. Is it better to mark photos I don't want in the web gallery as hidden (so I can just upload the entire gallery) or should I just select the photos I want to upload online into the web gallery? It seems to work either way. On one hand, it seems better to hide the photos, because then when they get synced to my iPhone, I have the most relevant photos and not the "extras." Also, if I'm showing photos from my laptop, I'm also showing the cream of the crop and not everything. On the other hand, the concept of hiding photos is kind of unusual to me. Feels strange to "hide" photos.
    2. What to do for a web gallery full size that's not as huge as the original camera size? When uploading to .Mac, I only have an option of Optimized or Actual Size. Optimized size is 1024 pixels wide. That's too small for a detailed views or for wallpaper purposes. The problem is that the "Actual Size" from my camera is huge (~3000 pixels wide). I don't really want to burden people with the downloading of the 2-3MB "Actual Size."
    However, it seems that it's tricky to implement such a 1200-1400-pixel-wide "full size" with iPhoto. There is no resize option within iPhoto that I could find. The best I could find was a crop with a constrain size option. I guess I would have to constrain-size crop to something like 1400x1000 first? And then crop again to get the shape I want?
    Also, sharpness adjustment seems useless when adjusting 7MP photos. In my Windows workflow, I found sharpness much more useful when tweaking photos after they have been resized to this "full-size" 1200-1400 wide resolution. This again means that I'd have to do the crop "trick". It feels strange though that everything else is so straighforward, but resizing photos within iPhoto isn't.
    I guess that's where the whole workflow question is. The iPhoto workflow is to keep your originals intact and maintain adjusted duplicates. But resizing is not a suggested part of this workflow--instead, it is expected that any resizing is done on the way "out" of the library (e.g. File->Export or web gallery publishing).
    I wish I could introduce an intermediate "optimized" setting for Web Gallery upload (although then I don't have that precise control of sharpness after resizing).
    Maybe I am overthinking this and, given that I have 10GB of storage space with .Mac, I should just give up and let it upload my 3000-pix wide 2-3MB JPG originals (i.e. use the "actual size" setting)?
    3. Can anyone provide some practical uses for the "albums" setting and contrast their use vs events? I just want to get a better insight into the practical difference. It seems that albums are not very useful or rather would be rarely used, given the main categorization of all photos into events. It seems that the only use for albums would be to bring together photos across different events. For example, I could make an album of all of the photos of my car's odometer or put together my best random city shots. Maybe I just answered my own question? Still, interested into your use of albums.

    ilp
    Welcome to the Apple Discussions.
    So now, the iPhoto workflow. What should it be?
    This is pretty good:
    1. Connect camera.
    2. Import all photos, naming each event after importing.
    3. Delete poor photos or blurry duplicates.
    4. Identify photos I want to display on the gallery (those worth keeping) and hide all others.
    Well I would make a small change here. There are reports of folks getting hidden photos turning up in their web galleries. So, instead I would flag the photos I want to upload and then create an ALBUM from them. (or you can just drag and drop them to an album) Also, you can add to your gallery simply by adding to the album. Or use Ratings and/or keywords, see below
    5. Crop and adjust shadows/colors/etc.
    6. Select "Web gallery" to share the event.
    (or Album)
    You cannot change the size of images that are in the Gallery. It's a flash based "movie". Those size options refer to the file size of images that you allow folks to download from the gallery.
    Events are a really limited way of organising your pics. Events in the iPhoto Window correspond exactly with the Folders in the Originals Folder in the iPhoto Library package file (Right click on it in the Pictures Folder -> Show Package Contents).
    You can move photos between Events, you can rename Events, edit them, create them, as long as you do it via the iPhoto Window. Check out the Info Pane (wee 'i', lower left) the name and date fields are editable. Edit a Event Name using the Info Pane, the Event Folder in iPhoto Library/Originals will also have the new name.
    That's it.
    Albums can be based on any criteria you can think of - and with Smart Albums this can be done automatically.
    For instance, back in your work flow above, you sort the pic and hide the one's you don't want to upload. Here's another way of doing it. Rate the pics, from 1 - 5, and then
    File -> New Smart Album
    Rating -> Is -> 5 stars
    will find your favourites. Best yet, it will update that album every time you rate new pics. You can base Smart Albums on a lot of criteria - date, rating, keyword, camera model... have a look and see the full list, and these can be combined together...
    The other great plus with Albums is that, because they are virtual, a pic can be in 1, 10 or 100 albums with no wasted disk space. But if a pic is in more than one Event you're dealing with a duplicate file.
    Frankly, a Event is a bucket of Pics, and Album is a coherent organisation based on any criteria you can think of.
    Regards
    TD

  • Screen-caps - A Photoshop Workflow

    Users often ask how to do screen-caps, to show what is happening with their program. Below are possible workflows for creating the screen-caps, and then there are instructions on how to "attach" the screen-caps to a Reply in the Adobe Forums, but only if one is accessing them via a Web browser - with e-mail access, you cannot attach a screen-cap, or other image file. There are first several utilities that will help you do this, but I will outline the steps using Adobe Photoshop and the Windows Clipboard. One can substitute their image editing program of choice, such as Photoshop Elements, PaintShop Pro, or other.
    Windows has a Clipboard feature, and one can use the Print Screen key (often seen as Prt Sc, etc., and depending on their computer, might have to also use a modifier key, such as the Ctrl key).
    First, set up your program, so that the necessary items are shown. This might be zooming in on the Timeline, even expanding it vertically, moving the CTI (Current Time Indicator with the red Edit Line attached), and perhaps selecting a problem Clip. Often, the Program Monitor will also need to be seen, and perhaps the Project Panel showing the proper Asset, or maybe the Effects Control Panel. Get these setup, so that they are visible, and where you want them. Now, hit the Print Screen key (see above for comments). The screen will now be an image in Clipboard.
    Open your image editing program. Here, I’m using Photoshop. Create a New Image. Photoshop will first look in the Clipboard, and if there is an image there, will even set up your New Image to match that w/ the proper pixel x pixel size. Here, I name that New Image with a name that means something to me, like, “PrE_Audio_Mixer_01.” I use the underscore, in lieu of spaces, as the forum software sometimes has problems with file names containing spaces. Yes, I know that this is so Windows 98, but it works well for me.
    Hit Ctrl+V to Paste the image from the Clipboard into this New Image. If my full screen-cap has captured more image area, than I need, I Crop to the important parts.
    Next, if I need to do call outs, or annotate the image, I use the Text Too, and maybe will draw boxes, or circles, to make sure that the viewer knows exactly where I want them to look and what to look for. To draw arrows, or lines, I use the Shape Tool, and/or the Pen Tool, and Stroke, or Fill these Paths, as is necessary.
    At this point, I have a Layered file with drawings and text, overlaying my screen image. I will do a Save_As and choose .PSD to keep my Layers handy for any additional editing, if necessary. The one problem is that the Adobe forum will NOT attach a .PSD file. Here, one has several choices. One is to do a Save_for_Web, and let PS Flatten the Layers, and merge them into one Layer. That will also remove any Alpha Channels, and/or Paths. Two popular formats are .PNG, or JPEG, and Save_for_Web allows for either of these. The choice is yours, but I normally just use JPEG with a Quality of about 9, in Photoshop to compress the image, but still leave it sharp enough for others to read. Again, PNG is a good choice as well, and will yield slightly better quality for the file size. Only possible issue is that many older browsers (what the viewers will be using to view the screen-cap) do not handle PNG. All newer browsers do, and do so very well. I have begun using PNG, instead of any compression of JPEG, and the results are better, and sharper.
    With the screen-cap image Saved to our HDD, I use the little “camera” icon, in the lower-middle of the Adobe Forum editing screen’s Toolbar, to actually attach the image:
    Here is an example of a screen-cap with the program setup as I needed, call outs and annotations:
    Hope that this helps. Note: other image editing programs will differ, as will various screen-cap utilities.
    Good luck,
    Hunt

    Neale,
    Thanks for that. I had never used Alt+Prt Scr on my Sager, and did not know of the specifics of that modifier key. On my laptop, I need to do Ctrl+Prt Scr, rather than the more common Prt Scr (no modifier key), but that is fairly specific to my Sager on the Clevo MoBo, with its keyboard. On many computers, just plain Prt Scr is all that's needed.
    I'll experiment with Alt+Prt Scr, as that might actually save me a Crop in PS, when doing a screen-cap.
    Thanks,
    Hunt

  • Viewing Aperture library items in iPhoto as workflow help

    I wanted to view my Aperture library jpegs in iPhoto without opening Aperture. The reason for this is to use iPhoto to review my pictures and to open in an external editor from iPhoto. We use Fireworks in designing web sites and newsletters. I did not want to save to another folder which takes up space. The workflow requires the use of Fireworks, crop out what we need from or graphics/pictures and place in the final work for Dreamweaver.
    I opened the Aperture library content and dragged the image folders to iPhoto. It did take the pictures and gave a notice for the files that were not imported. These were jpeg files, not the raw. Advantage is that the Aperture library is now the one resource for our workflow. I can switch from FireWorks to Photoshop when needed. We did not try this with the Raw files, but I suppose that could be done too. Opening the raw in PS would be helpful to some workflows.
    I thought this was a good tip. It has saved us quite a bit of time and is easy to use.

    I'm not sure I understand. If you're using iPhoto to review and edit jpg files you've pretty much nuked any reason to use Aperture at all. It also means that edited copies of your images are not tracked as versions and aren't backed up in the vault. Can you explain a little more what your workflow is?
    I'm do not want versions tracked in Aperture in this case. I want samples of textures or parts of image available for use in designing other graphics. We are in the graphics studio and want to open files in FireWorks, crop/marque out parts and paste to another FireWorks file. I have iPhoto set up to open externally in Fireworks. Think of it as needing 'clip art' out of picture in the library.
    What we are doing is designing banners for web sites and newsletters. I might want a horizon/sunset only as a background to blend into the banner. I have iPhoto open already along with Fireworks and Dreamweaver. No need to have Aperture or any other program open now. iPhoto has the jpegs..... click to open in FireWorks, marque, copy and past the parts I want into the banner design.
    Before that I had to have a resource folder of jpegs. The Aperture library can now store jpegs and access them from iPhoto. I have to hunt quickly through hundreds of image we have store for each texture and different subjects for these banner creations.
    Hope this helps. We just need small parts of any given image. This was a good solution. I'm sure there are others too.

Maybe you are looking for