Pre-Size Your PPI for Best Print - Once Good Advice Still Good?

In another thread someone mentinoed pre-sizing image data to prepare it for best printing.
For a long time it's been "standard advice" to resize images so that the ppi is an even division of the printer's dpi, because some years ago occasionally one would run across printers that would produce poor results if you didn't - you might see jaggies in straight edges for example.
Thing is, computers have (not so) quietly been getting more powerful over time, and printer makers have been competing with one another to try to make their printers produce better results than the other guys. One way they've done this is by improving the quality of the algorithms in the printer drivers. Use of mega storage and high accuracy math, which was once taxing on older computer systems, is now standard practice.
So it's time to question the old rule of thumb.
Making a few assumptions about the many variables (what printer, what OS, what version of drivers, what application being used to print) , there seem to be several questions here:
1. Can the image resolution be too high, causing the printer driver to make bad decisions about what ink dots to lay down where on the paper?
2. Does it help or matter if the image PPI is an even division of the printer's DPI?
As I have done in the past, I set out to do some actual testing, to see if I can actually SEE anything to help answer these questions.
I created a sharp image to be printed at 3 x 2 inches: http://Noel.ProDigitalSoftware.com/ForumPosts/Ghirardelli.jpg
Then I printed it at 6 different resolutions (1000, 720, 567, 300, 200, and 100 ppi) by resampling the image, labeling it, printing from Photoshop CS5, and feeding the same sheet of HP Premium Plus photo paper through my older HP 932c inkjet printer 6 times. The printer was set to its highest quality settings, including 2400 x 1200 dpi mode. This was the result:
I then looked critically and as objectively as I could at the different images. Here are my observations:
Naked eye:
The four highest resolution images (1000, 720, 567, and 300 ppi) all seemed to have an equivalent high level of crisp detail.
I could not detect the inkjet dots. Smooth objects look smooth.
Jeweler's Loupe:
I could see significant reduction in the finest details in the 300 ppi print vs. the three higher resolution prints, and a slight reduction in the 567 ppi vs. 720.
At no resolution were any jaggies or evidence of aliasing visible.
The inkjet dot pattern was plainly visible, and it does differ between the different prints. But it was not possible to say whether one was "better".
Things seem to have a little more texture in the 1000 ppi print vs. the 720 and 567 ppi prints.
Macro Photo:
Lacking a high resolution scanner, I took photographs of the 6 different prints. Unfortunately, I didn't have the time to set up with my best lighting and lens combination, so I got some reflections off the glossy paper, and and at this resolution I can't really see the inkject dots in the photos. I want to repeat this when I can find more time to do it better. As I did these photos hand-held, I believe the variances between them could be slightly influencing the results. But I'm going to post them anyway, for you to see.
I could see ever so slightly more detail in the 720 ppi print vs. the 1000 ppi print, though from the size of the tiny dust/light reflections I think it may have just been the better focused. Note that this observation is not supported by direct observation through the jeweler's loupe, above.
The 1000 ppi and 567 ppi prints seems to have slightly more noise or texture than the 720 ppi print. Again, this might be issues introduced by the photography process, though I did note a possible increase in texture in the 1000 ppi print with the jeweler's loupe as well.
Beyond just the blurring, I could see some evidence that straight lines are not quite as straight in the lower resolutions (300 ppi and lower). This seemed more apparent than with the jeweler's loupe examination, and I wonder whether the Photoshop downsampling process could have introduced it.
Left to right, top to bottom: 1000, 720, 567, 300, 200, 100:
Conclusions:
Printing to my HP 932c inkject printer on Windows 7 x64
300 ppi is not sufficient to coax the best possible detail out of an inkjet printer. It appears a number in the vicinity of 720 or more is better, and this number could be much higher with modern very high resolution printers (mine's old).
Speed was no different in printing any of these - a modern computer can process a huge amount of data in the blink of an eye.
When a sufficiently high resolution image is printed (in this case 567 ppi or higher) I saw virtually no evidence that a particular ppi value is superior, for example an even division of the printer's dpi, though in hindsight I realize I should have prepared a 600 ppi image (duh). I will add a 600 ppi image before I re-photograph the results.
It's possible ever so slightly more texture becomes visible at 1000 ppi than 720 ppi, but it might be just noise.
Practically speaking, from looking critically at the results I could not see a reason to pre-size the image for a specific ppi value.
I encourage you to experiment and report your results with your particular combination of gear.
Your comments are welcome!
-Noel

Noel Carboni wrote:
Jeff Schewe wrote:
I would never suggest people actually downsample though...why waste the pixels?
Exactly. There was a statement in another recent thread that downsampling to be an even fraction of the print dpi was important to do.
It might have been a misapplied extension of the advice to upsample. It's not been all that long that we've had big enough high resolution data that even makes downsampling a possibility.
-Noel
I believe I was the one to make that statement, which was based on recommendations by an Epson Print expert at a seminar demoing printers. He showed to prints from the same file, one set at an even multiple of 720 and the other some random number. It was subtle but visible the difference. That was probably 5 years ago.
In the meantime, I have made extensive tests of prints on my Epson 3800 trying many combinations of single pass, hi speed, Super fine print (2880x1440) and down to the basic level.
Everything evened out at 720 dpi. At 360, which is where I output from ACR, I can make an 8x12 print with no resampling whatsoever. Upping that to 720 and pushing the printer hard (2880x1440, single pass on Canson Platine), I see a discernable difference in the smooth tonalities.
As I understood you from past conversations, you employ the maximum output size from ACR which in my case, would double the file size by upsampling, and if necessary, downsample from that. I am not comfortable doing that as a default operation, but perhaps Jeff S might step in here and clarify. After all, ACR does offer that option! But my file size now goes from ~70MP to 143 MP, cutting my storage capability by 1/2. It's not a trivial matter when two of us here can run 600 to 800 images in 1/2 day!

Similar Messages

C4780 scan this alignment page for best print quality problem

My C4780 photosmart printer is stuck in the "scan this alignment page for best print quality" loop.
i.e. It keep display this message and refuse to print.
My OS is windows Vista Home.
I had followed the steps in the user manual but still cannot fix this problem.

Hi tsanchung,
From the description of your problem, it appears that the alignment process was not completed successfully.
I would recommend that you load the alignment page printed as shown in the section 'Step eight: Align the cartridges' in the link below to complete the alignment:
http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c01667624&cc=us&lc=en&dlc=en&product=3794615
I hope that this suggestion will help you fix the problem.
Regards,
Praveen
Click 'Kudos' to say Thanks!
(Although I am employed by HP, I am speaking for myself and not for HP)
Say thanks by clicking the Thumbs up icon in the post
Please mark reply as "Accept as Solution" if it solved the problem, so others can find it.
Although I am an HP employee, I am speaking for myself and not for HP

Image resize in CS5 vs cell size in LR3 for large print quality

What is the benefit of image resizing(larger) with resampling in photoshop than creating a larger cell size and increasing the DPI in LR3 if the file is to be printed just out of LR3. Is there a significant improvement in image quality if this is done in CS5, if so then what about the need for fractal program. I am taking my images with a D3x and making prints up to 20x30 on Epson 7900?

Interoperation from LR is far superior to the basic in PS CS 4, whilst this may have improved in CS 5 I haven't tried it and wouldn't expect it to be any better than LR 3. The print module in LR can also make it all a lot easier to do than using PS. Some may still prefer Genuine Fractals (I have a copy), however I have felt no need for it since LR 2. Any resizing I require is done using LR

Help! Handling Fonts for Best Print Quality

In a PS file, what is the best way to handle fonts, leave them as font or rasterize, before flatening and making PDF?

Both InDesign and Illustrator are much better choices for business cards than Photoshop.
- Dov

What is the recommended image resolution (dpi) for best result in a A0 (plotter) printing?

Is the 300 dpi resolution good enough (images>24bit>1680X1050 pixels) for best printing result in A0 (plotter)?

It sounds almost a trick question. 'How can I use a pen plotter with bit map images?' sort of thing. Plotters are designed for vector artwork, and more suitable for use with Autocad than Photoshop. However there are apparently workarounds, but the question might be more like 'how to convert bit map image for pen plotter?' rather than what resolution you need.
Is there a particular end use for this graphic that requires a plotter? Like laser etch, wood cutter etc. or is it just that the pen plotter can manage A0?

Possible solution for problems printing with ICC profiles - esp. R2400

(N.B. This is long because I've decided to go in to details about the background of the problem etc.. Also note that whilst my experience is with the Epson R2400, anyone with problems printing using ICC profiles in Aperture may find this post helpful, as will be explained further down the post.)
Ok, here's the situation. I've been an Aperture user for over a year, and an R2400 owner for half a year. In that time I have done a huge amount of experimenting, but I've never managed to get Aperture to work perfectly with Epson's 'premium' R2400 ICC profiles - the ones you can download from their site which are better than the ones provided 'in the box'. This hasn't been too big a deal because, in fact, the R2400 does a rather good job just set to 'System Managed' in Aperture and 'Epson Vivid' with a gamma of 1.8 in the printer driver. Nevertheless, it really annoyed me that something that should work wasn't, which is why I've spent a lot of time trying to figure out what's going on. Having said that, I have come across a method which will give you pretty good prints out of your Epson R2400 using the premium profiles in Aperture - it's not perfect, but it's the best you're going to get if you want to use those profiles in Aperture. I understand the words 'it's not perfect' aren't what photography experts would probably want to hear, however, I have seen a few anguished posts from R2400 owners in here before, so I think some people may find it useful.
The whole reason why Aperture is hopeless at using the R2400's premium profiles is because - unusually - their default rendering intent is set to 'relative colorimetric' rather than 'perceptual'. You might say 'but that's good - it means you get more accurate colours!', and if you do, you're right... however, there's a snag. To get an image to reproduce well using Epson's premium profiles and relative colorimetric rendering, you really need to use black point compensation. This is where the trouble lies: Aperture's black point compensation is diabolical to the point of being unusable when used with relative colorimetric rendering - I feel I need to be awarded compensation every time I've ever tempted to use the setting. So because BPC in Aperture is unusable, that effectively makes the premium profiles unusable too, because Aperture always uses the default rendering intent specified in the profile.
The solution? Use perceptual rendering instead. Ok, so you can't change the rendering intent in Aperture, which makes that sound a tad difficult. However, as I said in the above paragraph, Aperture always obeys the default rendering intent specified in the profile... so you can see where we're going with this: we need to change the ICC profiles' default rendering intent from 'relative colorimetric' to 'perceptual'. I did some digging around and found one or two expensive pieces of software that could do that... but then I found that, lo and behold, the Mac OS has a command-line utility which can do the job for us, for precisely £0.00. It's called SIPS or 'Scriptable Image Processing System', and you can find out some information about it here: http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn2035.html#TNTAG58 For those who don't like reading technical jargon however, here's what you need to do to convert a profile's rendering intent. First go to terminal, then type in the following command:
sips -s renderingIntent perceptual
Do not press 'enter' yet. Instead, add a space after 'perceptual', find the ICC profile you want to modify, and click and drag it into the terminal window. You should then find that your command looks something like this:
sips -s renderingIntent perceptual /Users/yourname/folder/RandomProfile.ICC
At which point you can then press 'enter', and the command will execute, giving you an ICC profile which will now make Aperture use perceptual rendering.
There is just one further thing to be aware of after doing this: for some crazy reason, you then need to turn on BPC in Aperture for the prints to come out as good as possible. Black point compensation shouldn't make any difference when using perceptual rendering as the idea of perceptual is that it takes account of things like that anyway, however, in Aperture BPC does make a difference, so remember to turn it on to get a half decent print. In general, I find that prints made using this setup come out pretty well; they almost perfectly match prints made using the profiles with a perceptual intent in Photoshop Elements, except for the fact that Aperture blocks up the shadows a bit more than Photoshop. However, if you can live with that, you might find this is quite a workable solution.
Now, I said near the beginning of this post that all the above can apply to other printers too. Most printer profiles have 'perceptual' set as their default rendering intent, in which case everything I've just said won't be of much help. However, If you are reading this because you're having problems with ICC profiles in Aperture, but you don't use an Epson R2400, find your problematic ICC profile, double-click on it, and take a look at the window that opens: specifically, at the 'Rendering Intent' the window mentions. If it doesn't say 'Perceptual' then it may well be worth trying the steps I've outlined in this post to set it to perceptual, to see if doing so produces an improvement when using the profile in Aperture.
Finally, just one note of caution: if you decide to try out the steps I've detailed above on a paid-for custom-made profile, please back your profile up before messing with it. I haven't experienced any problems when using SIPS to change a profile's rendering intent, but I obviously can't guarantee that it won't do something weird and corrupt your expensive custom-made profile.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask, although (contrary to any impression I may give) I am not a colour-management expert; I'm just someone who doesn't give up when they have a problem that should be solvable.
Thomas
Mac Pro 2.0GHz with 30" ACD; 15" MacBook Pro 2.0GHz Mac OS X (10.4.10)

Thomas
Wow - thanks for such a comprehensive post.
I have Aperture and a 2400 so this information is exceptionally useful to me.
Again - thanks for caring and sharing
Brian

Printing of Payment advice for Payments done by TT(Bank Transfers)

Hi
Any standard Tcode available for taking print of Payment Advice for payments made through bank transfers like TT to our vendors. Kindly share
as we have std Tcode FBZ5 for printing of payment advice for payments done through Checks
thanks & regards
salva bindu

Hi Bindu,
You can print the payment advices by selecting the Print immeidately in the variant we give in F110-prinout/medium tab.
In that variant, you give printer name and check print immediately.
~Thanks!
Rajesh

Hi all! What is the best way to create the correct space for baseball jersey names and numbers? along with making sure they are the right size for large printing.

What is the best way to create the correct space for baseball jersey names and numbers? along with making sure they are the right size for large printing.

Buying more hard drive space is a very valid option, here. Editing takes up lots of room, you should never discount the idea of adding more when you need it.
Another possibility is exporting to MXF OP1a using the AVC-I codec. It's not lossless, but it is Master quality. Plus the file size is a LOT smaller, so it may suit your needs.

Best PPI for Creating New Image in Photoshop

Hi,
Bunch of questions - all in BOLD. I am somewhat new to CS5 and have been playing around with making art in it. Yesterday I created a piece of art simply by selecting 6 inches by 6 inches in the dialog box (because I was thinking of just printing it out at home and gluing it to a 6 x 6 canvas). It defaulted to 72 ppi / RGB as it always does, and I was fine with that when I started the piece and also because I post these pieces of art to my blog on the web.
I am in the process of trying to create art for licensing and understand I will have to create things in CMYK for that (right?). I also understand that I should probably create a PS piece at 300 ppi (or is 355 ppi the new standard?)
I want to create the art on 12 x 12 photoshop windows ("scrapbook size") for manufacturers that will also allow the art to be sampled up and down a little bit (say down to 8 x 8 and up to 20 x 20). Is 300 dpi the best dpi, then, to create the piece at?
Also, is it possible to re-save the file for the web at 72 dpi / RGB for posting to my blog? What is the best way to do this?
Final question, I think, is that I will be printing out my art on my own home printer (4-color HP Vivera inks) for trade shows just to show it and am not concerned that it be the absolute-best of all possible prints. Just a pretty good rendition of it for display purposes and I obviously don't want to go through a boatload of ink and spend 20 years waiting for it to come out of the printer, etc. Can anyone recommend the best setting (CMYK? PPI???) for home-printing of 12 x 12's as such?
Thanks!

that all of these choices will allow me to save it as a copy?
When using Image > Image Size I would recommend duplicating the Image (Image > Duplicate) first to avoid the risk of overwriting the original.
I guess what you are saying is that the manufacturer is able to fiddle with CMYK values that he/she needs and I shouldn't worry about it and just create it in RGB.
Unless you know what space the actual print will be in you better stay in the larger gamut (as most RGB-spaces are likely to be in relation to most CMYK-spaces).
And even if you know the target-space working in RGB offers some advantages and avoids the risk of overshooting the allowed Total Area Coverage (as can happen when working in CMYK-files).
what would be the best way to go about trying to decide what possible CMYK profile I should use, and where in the program would I choose to set it and view it
• Where do you work (North America, Europe, Asia, …)? In Europe FOGRA sets the standard (ISO Coated v2 for sheet fed offset presses at current for example), in other regions of the world different standards may apply.
• What is the likely output for your images (Posters, newspapers, magazines, offset or gravure print, t-shirts, …)?
One can always ask one’s print provider which icc-profile fits their process.
You can use Photoshop’s soft proofing capabilities to get a preview of whatever color-space you find out to be the pertinent one under
View > Proof Setup > Custom
and save that. Then turn View > Proof Colors on or off as needed (command-Y).
But here (as with separation in general) you may want to look into the various Render Intents.
Additionally you can use View > Gamut Warning (command-shift-Y).
can I safely assume when I purchase a scanner and use that in the creation of some work that I should scan things in at 300 ppi?
300ppi effective resolution that is – this means that if you are likely to upscale an image in a layout program like Indesign or just print it out bigger you should do the scan accordingly bigger or with higher resolution so that in the end 300ppi are maintained for products that are likely to be viewed at or less than an arm’s distance.

My image is too large for the print service. Best options...

I shoot with a Nikon D800. It appears the images are too large for the print service. What's the best method to reduce file size? Open in Photoshop, edit size, and return to Aperture?

You would have to look in your TV settings, that is likely the issue.

Best Practices for setting up InDesign Effects for offset printing.

I'm new to the forum so I hope I'm posting my question in the correct place. I'm a prepress supervisor for a company that receives most of it's work as PDFs exported from InDesign. I notice on more and more work (proabably 75%) our customers are setting up their effects in InDesign. We receive files exported from CS3 and CS4, mac and pc. Our prepress system is Prinergy 4.1. We have job options that we recommend customers use for PDF export directly out of the applicaton and we are currently testing PDFX4. The problem is we don't have consistent results with our ripped files, we often see artifacts around items that use certain effects (such as the bevel and emboss effect), many times the customer uses a drop shadow along with the bevel and emboss and we see "pixelation" or low-resolution "jagginess." Files that use feathering often drop part of the feathered image and if black text is touching an effect it will process out to CMYK. If we have the InDesign file it sometimes works to change how the effect is applied (text, object, fill), sometimes we have to flatten on export or write a PDFX4. If we are working with the customer's PDF we often have to flatten at the rip, save the PDF as a postscript file or request the native files to troubleshoot. Are there guidelines to applying effects in Indesign? We would like to try to document for our customers recommended processes for creating files.
Thanks!

Our strongest recommendation at Adobe for best PDF print publishing workflow results is to use the PDF/X-4 settings for exporting PDF from InDesign 6 and saving PDF from Adobe Illustrator 14. (The "draft PDF/X-4" support of InDesign 5 and Illustrator 13 was based on a draft version of the ISO PDF/X-4 specification that was significantly modified prior to final ISO standard ratification and publication!) PDF/X-4 provides for a reliable workflow in which live transparency and color management is carried in the PDF file itself; no "flattening" of transparency effects or color conversions occur until as late as possible in the print workflow, preferably at the RIP itself!
PDF/X-4 is an excellent choice for PDF if you have a workflow which uses the Adobe PDF Print Engine technology in the RIP. In your case, Prinergy 4.1 does in fact provide Adobe PDF Print Engine technology. Make sure that (1) you enable the Adobe PDF Print Engine as opposed to CPSI and (2) you don't refine the pages as part of the Prinergy workflow (that process ruins your PDF by converting to PostScript and converting back to PDF - not something you want to do for a reliable PDF workflow with transparency and color management).
Note that even if you do use PDF/X-4 and properly configure your PDF workflow system / RIP, it is still incumbent upon the designer to produce reasonable content. Just because "it looks good on the screen" (additive screen color) doesn't mean that it will reasonably translate to ink on substrate (subtractive printing color). Adobe does provide guidelines for use of transparency and color on its website for use by designers to guide them.
- Dov

Fixing your iPhone 5 Battery Life - Once and for all!

Greetings folks - I'll get right into it here:
1. Let your iphone 5 drain completely out.
2. BUT, Once it gets on 1% however, you must go into: Settings>General>Rest>Reset All Settings.
(note: This will not ruin ANY of your personal info the phone. You will loose only a slight amount of settings for apple only apps. As well as your home and lock screen photos will need replacing. All very easy stuff to redo. Again, no worries here.
3. Charge your iphone for 2 hours or more ( for best results charge overnight)
Now, my histroy is this:
New iPhone 5 from factory. Lost 16% on standby overnight. And was continuing to loose battery at an unaceptable rate. Tried reseting DFU Restore with new firmware (as I read in other forums) That did NOT work for me. As of right now I am using all my features my iphone touts. No turning off notifcations for apps or bringing brightness lower. The ONLY thing I have turned off in iCloud is BOTH "Photo Stream" and Documents and Data. As, I do not need these on. I will be trying to turn them on in couple days and see if it makes difference. Oh, and I have check mail to 'Every hour'.
Please, if you Iphone 5 is suffering from BAD battery, this work around does works, just wish apple would allow for a script to do this for us all.
Plese give it a try. I was seriously ready to send my phone back until I read about "resetting all settings".
cheers

Hey there chris11350,
It sounds like you are seeing various unexpected issues when using your phone. I would start by closing all the running apps on the device:
iOS: Force an app to close
http://support.apple.com/kb/ht5137
Double-click the Home button.
Swipe left or right until you have located the app you wish to close.
Swipe the app up to close it.
When you have done that and restart the phone and test the issue again:
iOS: Turning off and on (restarting) and resetting
http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1430
If it persists, I would next backup your device to iTunes with this article:
iOS: How to back up and restore your content
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1766
And restore it from your backup with this article to erase the current iOS installation and install a fresh copy:
Use iTunes to restore your iOS device to factory settings
http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1414
Thank you for using Apple Support Communities.
All the best,
Sterling

Color management settings for the best print output

Color Management while Printing has been one of the challenging areas which has been discussed a lot over user forums and has been a painful area in terms of clear understanding while taking print outputs.
Here is an easy-to-understand KB (Knowledge Base) article ‘Color management settings for the best print output’ to help you get the best from your printers using PSE and bridge that knowledge gap.
This article explains color management in Photoshop Elements, how to get better prints, and addresses some of the following issues like horizontal/vertical streaks in print output, too dark or too light print output, ICC profile problems and Color differences between prints from PSE and other applications.
Thanks,
Garry

Thanks Noel.
Yes have shared in PSE forum as well. But I usually drop such posts on PS General forum so community moderators as well as our power users who mostly use both PS or PSE or are aware about can communicate to their students, audiences etc.
The idea is to reach out the message to as many as folks via relevant forums. Most of my otehr posts have found mentioned only on PSE forum.
Thanks for the feedback Nice to hear such a great feedback within 5 mts of publishing
Regards,
Garry

For best performance what's the size of an image to be stored in database?

Hi all,
can any one tell me..for best performance what's the size of an image to be stored in database?
is it <256kb or >256mb?
when i google we can store image as varbinary(max) and its limit upto 2GB..
Can anyone exlain it?
is it performance wise better..
thanx in advance..
lucky

Your question does not seem apparently meaningful. If you need to store a 5MB image in the database, you store a 5MB image, not a 200 KB image or a 200 MB image. Business needs always trumph performance.
Not surprisingly, the larger the image the more resources it takes to read and write it.
What is a meaningful question is whether you should use the FILESTREAM feature or not. The cut-off limit here is usually given as 1MB. That is, if your images typically exceeds 1MB you should use FILESTREAM and access the data through Win32
API. If your images are generally below this size, you should stick to regular T-SQL.
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, [email protected]

Best way to prepare photos for iPhoto printed book

Hello,
I was wondering what would be the best way to prepare photos for iPhoto printed book on a Macbook Pro so to achieve the most realistic results to what's on the screen
ie. which software should I use to change photos from RGB to CMYK, photoshop or iPhoto itself. I'm guessing maybe the autofix feature in iPhoto? (I don't have Aperture)
Secondly, which monitor color setting should I set the screen at? I'm guessing it's either Apple RGB or Colour LCD, maybe even ColorMatch RGB?
Any any other tips that people can give in achieving the most realistic results to what you have on the screen when your printed iPhoto book gets sent back. I don't want the mid tones to disappear or become too bright because the gamma and color settings were different to what they use at the other end.
Many thanks.

Hi,
The situation has changed a little, our original photos are in RAW format and some of them are slightly over saturated in the higher tones.
I've read on other threads that it is a good idea to run the 'Enhance' tool on all photos before sending the iPhoto Book away.
Since iPhoto's 'Enhance' tools seems to do a lot of helpful things like sharpen, adjust the levels, etc it also seems to notch the contrast up and this would prove destructive for the lighter and darker tones not captured by the camera's dynamic range.
So as I've been advised it's best to use Apple's own tools before sending the iPhoto Book away, so I'm going to download the trial of Aperture.
Does anyone have any more recommendations on which monitor colour profile setting to use etc. I've also read that iPhoto prints best from JPEGS so the RAW will obviously need changed. Will Aperture automatically save to Profile name: Camera RGB Profile after I've done some editing there?
What would be the best way to prepare RAW images in aperture where some of them might need an Image Overlay in Photomatix then imported back to Aperture for printing an Apple/iPhoto style Book?
Many thanks

Pre-Size Your PPI for Best Print - Once Good Advice Still Good?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for