Very confused about ppi, resolution, and image size...

I have read so much on these things and even posted along these lines here and there, but remain totally confused.
Say the size of my pictures is around 2000 x 3000. Once I download them to PSE, the resolution is 72ppi. Is this default and could I/should I change this?
I generally do four things with my pictures.
First I edit them.
Next I email to family members.
Then I order prints (99% are 5x7 or smaller)
Finally I store them (on computer with CD backup).
Now, space is a bigger concern than quality since I print small prints generally. So what would be my best options for saving my files, but getting very nice prints?
Right now, once I edit, I save my files in .jpg, baseline "optimized" at 72ppi. Only following the computer defaults though, not because I think this is best. Would I be better off saving in TIFF or is this not necessary?
Any links with further info would be appreciated also.
Thank you,
Amy

Amy,
1. I just took a picture today, and when I look in Image>resize>image size the dimensions are as follows:
W=2288px H=1712px W=31.778" H=23.778" @72px/in. resolution
When I change resolution to 325 px/in., W=7.04" H=5.268"
As the resolution is increased, the dimensions decrease. This is what is called an inverse relation.
Why did I change to 325px/in? Because for printing it is desirable to have a resolution of 240-300 px/in, or so. Also, note that this resolution gives me almost a perfect 5x7 size format, and one can crop off the excess readily. If one desires 4x6 size, one can crop to that dimension.
2. I enhance the pictures next, leaving sharpening for the last step
3. I save primarily in PSD and/or JPEG. Both PSD and TIFF allow one to retain layers, are lossless, and thus one avoids degradation with sequential editing. JPEG is is a compression format which conserves disk space (in comparison to PSD and TIFF), and is most likely required for your e-mail and your photo finisher. I save some of the JPEG files. I usually elect baseline optimized, and the JPEG allows me to elect quality 8, which is good for my purpose and results in a manageable file size.
4. Right after I download my picture files from the camera, I burn them to a CD (i.e. before I do anything else), and right after I finish the final edits I burn them to CD as well. This is my "film", if you will. If the computer fails or if I should accidentally delete a file from disk, I still have it available.
I am sure that others will post, but that is my current work flow.
Ken

Similar Messages

  • Changing resolution and image size doesn't change result on screen?

    I'm using Photoshop CS3. I am trying to change the resolution of several images that will be printed in a newspaper. So the current images are 72 ppi and really huge -- for example 36 x 27 inches (document size), and when I change them to 300 ppi, the image sizes shrink to about 8 x 6 inches, as I expect. But the image I see on the screen doesn't change. So, for example, when I open up the image originally, it's at 33% and the entire image is visible. After I change the resolution, and the image size has changed accordingly, the image still appears the same and it remains at 33%. Shouldn't the image shrink on the screen since its size has shrunk? Or if it remains the same on the screen, shouldn't the percentage shift? I mean if the document size is now 8 x 6, it should be able to be displayed at 100% and not fill my whole screen... I'm so confused. Thanks...

    gradded,
    The "Document Size" area of the Image Size dialog is just to indicate the size (in inches) that your document will be printed. The ppi adjustment has nothing to do with what is displayed on your monitor. Your monitor doesn't care anything about ppi. The monitor contains a certain number of pixels and after you change that ppi setting, the monitor will still have that same number of pixels.
    As long as you leave the "Resample Image" box unchecked, your image size (Pixel Dimensions) will not change. You will see no change on your monitor. If you check the "Resample Image" box, then your image size (in pixels) will change.
    Hope this helps.

  • About printer resolution and paper size

    I need information about how to use the class PrinterResolution and his relation width paper size.
    When i provide a cross a feed resolution to this class bigger values results in low resolutions: why? i dont now the DPI resolution meaning.
    Please somme code example about this theme...Thanks a lot...

    Amy,
    1. I just took a picture today, and when I look in Image>resize>image size the dimensions are as follows:
    W=2288px H=1712px W=31.778" H=23.778" @72px/in. resolution
    When I change resolution to 325 px/in., W=7.04" H=5.268"
    As the resolution is increased, the dimensions decrease. This is what is called an inverse relation.
    Why did I change to 325px/in? Because for printing it is desirable to have a resolution of 240-300 px/in, or so. Also, note that this resolution gives me almost a perfect 5x7 size format, and one can crop off the excess readily. If one desires 4x6 size, one can crop to that dimension.
    2. I enhance the pictures next, leaving sharpening for the last step
    3. I save primarily in PSD and/or JPEG. Both PSD and TIFF allow one to retain layers, are lossless, and thus one avoids degradation with sequential editing. JPEG is is a compression format which conserves disk space (in comparison to PSD and TIFF), and is most likely required for your e-mail and your photo finisher. I save some of the JPEG files. I usually elect baseline optimized, and the JPEG allows me to elect quality 8, which is good for my purpose and results in a manageable file size.
    4. Right after I download my picture files from the camera, I burn them to a CD (i.e. before I do anything else), and right after I finish the final edits I burn them to CD as well. This is my "film", if you will. If the computer fails or if I should accidentally delete a file from disk, I still have it available.
    I am sure that others will post, but that is my current work flow.
    Ken

  • I get resolution warnings when I know the resolution and image size exceed

    I am using images that exceed the required resolution (300 dpi) for the size used (8 1/2" x 11"). Mostly these are on full page images. anyone run into these problems?

    Error -36 is I/O error, w/o specifying if the error is in the source or the target.
    So, first of all, verify your disk(s) with Disk Utility, just to make sure there's no problem there.
    If there isn't, then there's a problem with the download. Consult "EVE online" (whatever that might be) tech support and user forums.

  • Hi there! So I am using Lightroom 3 on a pc and I have ran into an issue when exporting images. The DPI and image size (in inches) that I am selecting during the export process. For example I just exported a collection and set the dpi to 180 and the size

    Hi there! So I am using Lightroom 3 on a pc and I have ran into an issue when exporting images. The DPI and image size (in inches) that I am selecting during the export process. For example I just exported a collection and set the dpi to 180 and the size to 7 inches on the long edge. My exported result is 457 dpi and sized at 3200x2134 pixels.. Any ideas on why this is happening and what I can do to correct it?

    The DPI setting in a digital image has no meaning at all. You need to learn how to calculate what you need in your exported image. The only measurement in a digital image that has any meaning is the number of pixels in each direction. It doesn't matter what you set that DPI to (actually it's PPI or pixels per inch). The image will have the same number of pixels regardless of the setting. If you need an image that is 5 x 7" (for example) at 200 PPI then you would want an image that measured:
    5 x 200 = 1000 pixels
    7 x 200 = 1400 pixels
    So you would need an image that is 1000 x 1400 pixels to have a 5 x 7" image at 200 PPI. The reason your exported image had such a high PPI setting is because you specified the number of inches you wanted the image to be. And there were enough pixels in the image that it calculated out to be that high PPI setting.
    I apologize, I don't explain this very well. But you need to learn to do the math to determine how large you really want your exported images to be.

  • I'm horribly confused about student licensing and commercial use

    As the title says I'm horribly confused about student licensing and using it for commercial use.
    I currently have a Student Licensing version of Adobe Creative Suite 4 that I purchased through my school's journeyEd portal.
    Seeing how CS5 is now out I was browsing looking at prices (why not upgrade while I'm still a student, right?) and while browsing I bumped into one source that says that Student Licensing can not be used for commercial purposes, and this is when the confusion started. I remember reading before that we are able to use student licensing for commercial purposes, okay time to google search. I found one Adobe FAQ that says I can. .
    http://www.adobe.com/education/students/studentteacheredition/faq.html
    " Can I use my Adobe Student and Teacher Edition software for commercial use?
    Yes. You may purchase a Student and Teacher Edition for personal as well as commercial use. "
    and I found this old thread;
    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/314304
    Where an poster listed as an employee of Adobe states
    "There is no upgrade from the CS3 Educational Edition to the comparable CS3 editions sold in non-academic environments. If you have an educational version of for CS3 obtained legitimately (i.e., you qualified for the educational version when you obtained it), you may continue to use that software for the indefinite future, even for commercial use! You cannot sell or otherwise transfer that license, though! When the next version of the Creative Suite is released, you will have two choices: (1) If you still qualify for the educational version, you can buy a copy of that next version (there is no special upgrade pricing from one educational version to another; the price is already very low) or (2) you can upgrade from the educational version of CS3 to the full version of the next version of the Creative Suite as an upgrade from CS3 at the prices published at that time. "
    Okay cool, hmm what this? Adobe is asking me if I want to IM with live costumer service agent, sure why not? Then the conversation started and I asked her my question about using my CS4 license for commercial use, she asks for my product code and email to verify my product, then informs me I can purchase the upgrade version of CS5 and use that for commercial, okay great, but not really answering my question. I reword it and give her a link to that FAQ page it goes like this. ..
    "[CS Rep] : [My name], I would like to inform you that Adobe Student and Teacher Editions are not allowed for
    commercial use.
    [CS Rep] : However, you can upgrade your current software to a normal upgrade version, and you can continue
    using it for commercial purpose.
    [Me] : Then is the FAQ page mistaken? Because it is very misleading if it is. But thank you for the information.
    [CS Rep] : You are welcome.
    [CS Rep] : I apologize for the misleading information in the FAQ."
    . .And after that, I went back to being confused.
    SO my questions are. . . Can I or can't I use my Adobe Creative Suite 4 student licensing for commercial purposes? and If I purchase a Student Licensing of CS5 can I use that for commercial purposes as well?
    Sorry for the long post, I just want to be perfectly clear on what I can and can not do with my purchase.

    The rules differ in various parts of the world. In North America you can use it for commercial work.
    There are no student/academic upgrades. The pricing is so low that in many cases you're better off buying another full student license but you are eligible for upgrade pricing for commercial versions once you're out of school.
    You may not transfer the student license in any way.
    Bob

  • Merge TIFF file Resolution and page size differs. Clue ?!

    Hi All,
    I'm able to merge multiple TIFF files into one. But the resultant multi page TIFF file has different resolution and page size than from the source files. The width and height will get exchanged, also those texts are appear stretched.
    Noteably, it happens particularly with FAX pages of TIFF files, not with any others (like printed page TIFF files).
    can you help me ? Please write here your points.
    Thanks a lot,
    Vasu

    I see I attached the link to the wrong discussion. It should have been this one. Scroll down to the workaround posted by Tomas, from August 26th.
    http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1078666&start=0&tstart=0
    Anyway, yes, that's sort of what I mean. On my iWeb 06 website, I've scaled all my pictures down to 800px x 600px with a resolution of 72dpi for online viewing. The original photos, say 3000px x 2000px at 300dpi, are simply saved on my harddrive and not used in iWeb. The thought behind that was for faster loading times for people visiting my website. I'm pretty sure when I saved these reduced copies in Photoshop, the default color profile was sRGB. However, when I look at my site on my office (Windows) PC, the pictures appear dark, especially Black & White ones. But the color profile is a separate issue covered in Tomas' workaround.
    Now, maybe I'm operating on a false assumption, but I thought with this new download feature in iWeb and .Mac Web Gallery you would want to use your photos in full resolution so that when a visitor sees a picture they like, they can download the picture from your site AND could even print it if they so chose. Again, I'm assuming you would use your full resolution photos when you build your site and iWeb would do its own scaling for viewing on the web, but the full resolution photos would be somehow held in reserve for the moment when someone selects 'download'. I'm just concerned that using an unscaled, full resolution photos, would slow down the page building speed so much, that visitors would be too border to bother waiting for the pages to load. Thanks.

  • Just bought a Nikon d750 and confused about adobe LR4 and PS6 support for the RAW files. I have DNG 8.7 but wondering if LR and PS will import direct soon Thanks for any advice

    Just bought a Nikon d750 and confused about adobe LR4 and PS6 support for the RAW files. I have DNG 8.7 but wondering if LR and PS will import direct soon Thanks for any advice

    Support for the Nikon D750 was introduced in the latest version of LR 5.7 and ACR 8.7 on Novemder 18th 2014.
    Further updates to LR 4 were stopped when LR 5 was released on June 9th 2013. No further updates for bug fixes and new camera support.
    Nada, LR 4 will never support Nikon D750. The Nikon D750 was introduced into the market in September 2014 some 15 months after further development of LR 4 was discontinued.
    You can use the Adobe DNG program (free download for the package) to convert the Nef (raw) files from your Nikon D750 to the Adobe DNG format which will permit you to import those into LR 4. This is the crutch provided by Adobe to allow for the processing of raw files with outdated versions of LR and ACR.
    You can also update the ACR plugin for PS CS6 to version 8.7 which can also work with the raw files from the D750. For direct support in Lightroom you will need to upgrade (paid) to version 5.7.

  • My friends has found he has, since 2006, accumulated multiple apple ids. he's very concerned about icloud security and security in general, having his pc hacked repeatedly. how can he permanently delete the extra, apple ids, please?

    my friend has found he has, since 2006, accumulated multiple apple ids. he's very concerned about icloud security – and security in general, having had his pc hacked repeatedly. how can he permanently delete the extra, apple ids, please? Thanks.

    Hello, windypinesands.  
    Thank you for visiting Apple Support Communities.  
    If your friend is concerned with the security of his Apple ID or iCloud account, I would recommend reaching out to our Apple ID Account Security team to assist him with this issue. 
    Apple ID: Contacting Apple for help with Apple ID account security
    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5699
    Cheers,
    Jason H.

  • Changing Resolution and Document size

    Hello - I have a jpeg from a digital camera that I Saved As photo.psd with an original Document Size of 44" x 66" @ 72 ppi resolution.
    I am using CS3 and I want to prepare the photo for printing while maintaining the highest quality possible. The first thing I did was uncheck Resample Image. Then I changed the resolution to 300. This gave me a Document Size of 10.56 x 15.84.
    I want to enlarge the Document Size to 16" x 24" (the same proportions). So, it seems to me that the next step is to now check Resample Image and put in my new Document Size of 16" x 24". I would then apply some Unsharp Mask as desired.
    So, should Ifollow the steps above or do you recommend a different workflow?
    I've read that Photoshop will upres very well up to 200% and all I need is 166%, so it should work ok. Also, do you recommend standard Bicubic or Bicubic Smoother?
    TIA

    What you're suggesting will work, though you don't really need to do it in multiple steps.  One step, with resampling checked, once you set all the fields as you want, will do the trick.
    And for all the hype and mystery surrounding the two alternate choices for resampling, in all my work for minor resampling I always find I prefer Photoshop's original Bicubic method.  For extreme upsampling I prefer, personally, a plug-in called Genuine Fractals.
    Also, modern print drivers are getting very good at size matching...  If the image quality in your file is to your liking, you COULD just set the print size in inches (without resampling) and be done with it.  This would yield an image at a resolution lower than 300 pixels/inch, but would save you some work, and it may very well be that you will not be able to see any difference by letting the driver do the resampling as needed.
    -Noel

  • Aperture/Photoshop plug in and image size

    I'm having a problem I don't really understand.  I have Aperture 3 and I have CS5 that I'm trying to use as a plug-in for Aperture.  This is half an Aperture question and half a Photoshop one so I hope someone can answer it for me.
    In Photoshop I made an "action" that is a sort of raised beveled watermark for my photos. 
    I open one of my images in Aperture and "fix" it - soften the skin, blur the background (whatever...) then I go to the top menu item "Photos" and go down and pick "edit with Adobe CS5."  And my image opens in Photoshop.  I go to the menu and pick the watermark action but when it works my watermark can't really be "read" because it's not fitting on the photo, it's too big and falls off the edges.  The photo is 1241x1280 px.
    But here is the odd thing.  If I take that same photo, the very same size 1241x1280 and open it directly in photoshop, completely bypass Aperture, and run the watermark action, it's actually a bit small (but usable) it fits fine in the very same photo!  When I check the image size in Photoshop it is the same size (regardless of if I open in photoshop directly or go there from Aperture).
    So this problem only seems to happen when I edit the photo from Aperture.  I'm new to both Aperture and Photoshop (crazy to try and learn 2 programs at once) and I don't know if I can make just the watermark layer in photoshop smaller.  But again it fits fine if I apply it directly from Photoshop bypassing Aperture.
    Does anyone know why this happens and how I can make the watermark work?  Or can I make a watermark in Aperture?
    Thanks for any help,
    Susan

    susan-kelly wrote:
    Like I said when I rescale it they way you said to do in photoshop it changes the size and distorts it a bit.
    If you hold down the 'Shift + Option' keys while scaling, the text, shape or raster object will not distort and will resize from the center (AKA - maintain aspect ratio).
    I run the full version of PS, so am not sure if the commands are exactly the same if you are running PS Elements, but there is a command at 'Layer menu > Layer Style > Scale Effects..' which can be used for scaling the bevel settings to match the scaling of the watermark item.
    One exact way to do this in PS full version is to choose the Edit > Transform > Scale command and then use the option bar fields under the main menu bar to change the 'H' (Height) and 'W' (Width) percentages equally (to say 70% in each) and then use the aforementioned 'Layer........Scale Effects' command and enter 70% in that dialog. This should reduce the watermark and effects appropriately without distortion.
    Note - indeed both programs are very deep (especially PS), but that just gives you more fun to learn as you go. Don't worry about mastering either, just work within a structured workflow so you can take the steps at your own pace.
    Again, I am not sure what version of PS you are running, but the one book I suggest looking into more than any other is at the link below. It is somewhat dated, but the information is completely relevant and covers the general usage of Photoshop to make anyone comfortable with the tool set.
    http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Photoshop-Unmasked-Science-Selections/dp/0321441206/ ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1307824869&sr=8-1
    The companion website is still up and you can download all the images used in the book if you want to practice on the same images he outlines. Well worth a look if you want to learn Photoshop.

  • Getting file header size and image size

    Hi all,
    Now that the AVI file type won't work for me, I have to do some of that functionality myself.
    I can use the function to Get File Size, and the size is returned in bytes, so far so good.
    I figured I could calculate the image size by taking the resolution, multiply X and Y, that gives me the number of pixels.
    Then multiply pixels by bit depth, to get the number of bits, divide by 8 for the number of bytes.
    Since bit depth is 8, the number of bytes will be exact (and the same as the number of pixels).
    When I did the math, and divided by the file size, it didn't come to a round number, and was a larger number than the number of images I could display.
    I figured there is probably additional information stored with each image, but I don't know how to adjust for that.
    There may be byte clustering happening, making each image larger than the actual byte count would indicate.
    And, there is probably file header info, but not sure where to get that.
    I looked through the IMAQ functions, and didn't see one about getting the image size (I did see the one that returns resolution, but I have that data already).
    Any suggestions on how I can calculate how many images are in my binary file?
    And, how to get the byte sizes I need to be able to set the file pointer correctly to get an image out of the middle of the file?
    Thank you for any suggestions,
    Jeff

    If I understand correctly You have binary file with multiple images inside and You want to extract that images?
    Depending on image type You can search by tags where image begins and ends: http://www.impulseadventure.com/photo/jpeg-decoder.html and extract.

  • Photo resolution and jpeg size

    Back in the early days of iWeb 1.0, there was a problem with uploading large (file)sized photo and the corresponding slow loading times for visitors to your site. If you used your original sized photos on a photo page, they would be displayed at 800px x 600px and could easily be over 500kb. The original photo, if memory serves me correctly, was still uploaded to the iDisk and acted as a drag of the whole website. Thus, the solution was to reduce all photos to 72dpi and size the photos for the photo page at 800px x 600px in Photoshop or a similar program. It also meant creating thumbnails for my blog page entries to be dropped into the placeholder photo box (reduce transparency to 0 - the thumbnail would appear properly on the blog summary page) and use a pre-sized photo for the blog page itself.
    My question then is the optimal size for photos. Can one use original sized photos in iWeb 08 or does it make sense to continue to pre-process photos, reducing resolution and size? I guess this would not make sense for photos that you plan to make downloadable.
    This discussion about color management I find extremely valuable, as I was always disappointed about how my site looked on Windows machines.
    http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=5249784&#5249784
    Since I'm going to have to re-process the color balance of my photos when I rebuild my site in iWeb 08 (I believe its not possible to update my current iWeb 06 site for reasons I mentioned in another post), I wonder if I could use the original sized photos as is or whether I should reduce their size and resolution (most of the photos I've shot digitally are at 300dpi, I have also scanned all my old analog photos at 300dpi). Thanks!

    I see I attached the link to the wrong discussion. It should have been this one. Scroll down to the workaround posted by Tomas, from August 26th.
    http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1078666&start=0&tstart=0
    Anyway, yes, that's sort of what I mean. On my iWeb 06 website, I've scaled all my pictures down to 800px x 600px with a resolution of 72dpi for online viewing. The original photos, say 3000px x 2000px at 300dpi, are simply saved on my harddrive and not used in iWeb. The thought behind that was for faster loading times for people visiting my website. I'm pretty sure when I saved these reduced copies in Photoshop, the default color profile was sRGB. However, when I look at my site on my office (Windows) PC, the pictures appear dark, especially Black & White ones. But the color profile is a separate issue covered in Tomas' workaround.
    Now, maybe I'm operating on a false assumption, but I thought with this new download feature in iWeb and .Mac Web Gallery you would want to use your photos in full resolution so that when a visitor sees a picture they like, they can download the picture from your site AND could even print it if they so chose. Again, I'm assuming you would use your full resolution photos when you build your site and iWeb would do its own scaling for viewing on the web, but the full resolution photos would be somehow held in reserve for the moment when someone selects 'download'. I'm just concerned that using an unscaled, full resolution photos, would slow down the page building speed so much, that visitors would be too border to bother waiting for the pages to load. Thanks.

  • Confusion about UEFI/BIOS and GPT/MBR compatibility issues

    So a user said in another post that they were NOT able to boot in UEFI mode and install Fedora even though it is UEFI compatible.  But this person was able to useLegacy mode and install Fedora, and furthermore, was able to "keep the Windows partition."  I'm guessing that means that Win 8 that came with it, which would be installed in UEFI/GPT mode, correct?  I'm specificly referring to the Y510P but from what I understand *every* laptop that comes preinstalled with Win 8 must be UEFI/GPT.
    So the way I understand it is that the installed Fedora is in "BIOS"/GPT mode rather than "BIOS"/MBR mode because you can't have both GPT and MBR on the same disc.
    I have just started learning about this UEFI/BIOS and MBR/GPT nonsense, and it's going to drive me crazy until I finally understand it. So I guess what I'm asking is:
    1) When I get my y510p I assume it will be in UEFI/GPT mode. Can I install non-UEFI distros alongside it as I take it was done with Fedora?
    2) If I install a linux distro alongside Win 8, do I have to worry about compatibility issues with a drive that is in GPT format? Or does the MBR/GPT issue have nothing to do with it, so I don't have to worry about ever changing my drive to MBR?  
    For example, I read that Win 7 must be installed either as BIOS/MBR or UEFI/GPT.  This can not be mixed and matched.  This means that if I could not get the Windows 7 installer to boot in UEFI I would have to install as MBR.  This also means I would have to format the drive and reinstall Win 8 on the MBR.  
    So my question is do other OS's like Linux have these restrictions?  (For example, if a particular distro will not boot in UEFI and therefor MUST install on MBR)
    3) I have a pendrive with YUMI installed with a ton of distros/tools/Win installs/etc. (It is a USB boot tool like unetbootin that allow you to add multiple bootable images.) When I tried it recently on my dad's laptop.  I have used it many, many times with my older computers, none of which were UEFI.  It works great.  Now that I've had a recent encounter with my dad's ASUS Windows 8 computer (not with the y510p yet) I found out that UEFI seems to be complicating the crap out of things (for me, at least.)
    So when I used this computer, I noticed that when I boot (with legacy mode enabled) and enter the "boot selection screen" in order to boot with USB, I have two options a) UEFI:"name of usb" and b) "name of USB". The UEFI option would NOT boot, but it would boot without the UEFI: option.
    So does this mean that I am booting in non-UEFI mode and once I have booted this way and choose a distro to install that it CANNOT install in UEFI mode?  I recently saw a tool called Rufus that I have yet to try that has an option to set the bootable USB to UEFI, so that would possibly work if I wanted to install a UEFI compatible distro (Arch linux is what I'm wanting.)
    4)  If installing a UEFI compatible distro (such as Arch) requires that the USB device be able to boot in UEFI mode has anyone been able to do this?  Has anyone even been able to boot a device in UEFI mode to do *anything* such as run a live linux?  
    I'm 99% sure I would be able to boot in legacy mode and run a live linux (because I did so on my dad's computer) but the problems arise when I consider how to INSTALL.
    I would really like to know the answers to these questions (as scattered as they are.) Any help would be appreciated!
    Unnecessary info:
    (I started learning about BIOS/UEFI and MBR/GPT the hard way a few days ago by trying for hours to install Windows 7 on my dad's Windows 8 laptop because I could NOT get Win 7 installation to work...it kept asking for drivers before I could install until I finally used the Windows USB install tool, put the stick in a different USB, AND formatted the drive as MBR because Windows 7 would NOT install on the existing GPT drive until I used diskpart.exe -clean. And I have read that Win 7 64 bit will work fine on a UEFI/GPT setup. I used the Windows 7 USB boot tool which did NOT give me a UEFI: and regular option. It showed up simply as "name of usb" without a UEFI in front. Since I read that Windows 7 must either be in BIOS/MBR mode or UEFI/GPT mode that this drive would not boot in UEFI mode, and I don't know why...Although I believe I read that Win 7 cannot be installed from a USB in UEFI/GPT mode, only BIOS/MBR.  UEFI/GPT mode requires a DVD install but I did not have a drive to test this.)

    I have a Y510p which is running dual boot Windows 8.1 and Arch Linux.   I think that it is strongly advised to do plenty of reading ahead of any install if you will be using UEFI and Linux so that you understand all the issued before making critical changes to the existing system.
    Yes, if the machine comes with Windows 8 (as mine did) then the disk will be formatted with a GPT partition table (instead of the old MBR partitioning scheme), and will boot using UEFI. If you are going to try to keep the existing Windows 8 system and add Linux then you will need to keep the disk with its GPT partition table and partition structure, but you can shrink the Windows 8 C: drive to make space for the Linux partitions that are needed ( a root partition and at least a /home and/or /opt partition and possibly a linux swap partition also ).  If you want to boot the Linux install via UEFI then you can simply add the required boot directory to the EFI System Partition (ESP).
    However it is very important that before trying to do any linux install that you switch off Fastboot from within WIndows 8 (or 8.1). Also most Linux distributions are in some difficulty booting using Secure Boot, though a few such a Ubuntu and Fedora are supposed to be able to do so. Hence it is much easier to work with Linux if Secure Boot is first switched off from the BIOS settings menu.
    The order of operations that I used was;
    1) Switch off Secure Boot from the BIOS - and boot back into the Windows 8 system to check that it boots OK.
    2) With Windows 8 running go into the settings and switch off Fastboot (which does a hybrid suspend when it shuts down instead of a full normal shutdown - if you don't do this then the memory gets overwritten when booting Linux in the future which means booting back into Windows will fail). 
    3) Reboot back into WIndows and check all is well, and if so then use the disk management facility within Windows 8 to shrink the C: drive to make room for the Linux partitions.
    4) Reboot to check Windows 8 still boots OK.  
    5) If you are going to update to Windows 8.1 then do so, and then update everything once it is booted (it is a huge update and takes ages!). Once done then you will likely have to update drivers for the graphics cards, the clickpad and possibly the wireless chip and ethernet chip. I found that I needed to get drivers that were newer than were available on the Lenovo website, by going to the relevant hardware manufacturer website (eg for synaptics for the clickpad). Then spent a week or so in the evenings getting Windows 8.1 configured the way I like it.
    6) Then I did a lot of reading about the various options for the boot manager that would suit a UEFI boot for a dual boot system for Windows 8.1 and Arch Linux and there was a choice of Grub, Gummiboot, rEFInd, and others - and after reading the details I decided on rEFInd as my boot manager which can boot not only any new Arch Linux install but automatically finds the Windows UEFI boot files and presents the options in a nice graphical window once the system gets past POST at bootup.
    7) It was important to check which partition was the ESP and to know what partitions I needed to create for the Arch Linux system.  Then I went ahead and booted from a usbkey to a uefi install system, and very carefully proceeded with a standard Arch Linux install, being particularly careful to know where to put the rEFInd boot manager files and the kernel and initrd files. Also I used efibootmgr to write the appropriate NVRAM boot entry in the motherboard memory so that the uefi boot system knows where to find the rEFInd uefi boot files in the ESP.
    8) Once complete the system boots to Arch Linux as the default, with a nice Windows icon which you can select with the arrow keys within the boot timeout period (default 20 seconds).
    I noted also that it is possible to create boot stanzas in the rEFInd boot manager config files which allow rEFInd to chain load other Linux systems or even other bootloaders if you wish - so it is very flexible. So if you want to you could install a grub standalone set of diretories/files so that if the normal linux boot fails then you can select the grub icon from rEFInd and chainload grub to boot either the same Archlinux install, or point to a third linux distribution if you have more partitions containing that third install which might be Ubuntu or Mint or ....
    Either way although getting to understand how uefi boot works is a learning curve it is actually generally simpler than the old legacy BIOS boot. With uefi you no longer need an MBR on the drive, and only a suitable EFI System Partition which has to be VFAT formatted. However if you want to have one of the linux distributions booting from legacy MBR then you need to create an MBR at the start of the drive - so you would need to move the start of the first partition and create a suitable sized Master Boot Record otherwise MBR boot can't work. If you do that then of course you have to be careful if the Windows partition is the one being re-sized that it doesn't mess up the Windows boot! However since using uefi to boot rEFInd allows a chainload to grub/gummiboot or other bootloaders then there should be no need to mess with MBR booting if you go down that route.
    If you are interested in rEFInd then the author Rod Smith has a good set of documentation that describe the details at http://www.rodsbooks.com/refind/
    He is also the author of a really excellent disk partitioner for GPT disks - http://www.rodsbooks.com/gdisk/
    Clearly it is necessary to read up on the boot facilities available for any linux distribution that you plan to put on the system.
    One nice thing is that uefi boot with an efistub supported kernel build is really fast on the Y510p. My system boots Arch linux in about 7 seconds to the KDE login prompt once the POST is complete and that only takes a couple of seconds.  Of course Windows is much slower once it is selected at the rEFInd screen and takes somewherearound 40 seconds or so to boot, but at least Linux is super fast!
    Anyway I hope that this helps.

  • Premiere Pro CS4: Output Issue - codec and image size

    I am having an issue when outputing a video file from Prem Pro to Media Encoder.  The dimensions of the input video are the usual 720x576.  The output I need is 390x390 to match my project.  By choosing the Sorenson 3 video codec I am able to adjust the size from 720x576 to 390x390.  However, it also applies black bars to the top and bottom of the image.  I don't want this.  If I choose the DV PAL video codec the black bars are removed in the output but I do not have control over the image size.
    In Prem Pro 1.5 the media encoder allowed for this and I was able to create a cropped video image (390x390) without black bars.  By selecting the zoom option the image was fitted into the window size.  There is no zoom option in CS4 in Media Encoder.  This is very frustrating!
    Any help would be appreciated...
    Thanks, Neil

    This is odd indeed, and I cannot recall having read of such. The tips were just the general things that one normally checks out, when there are audio issues, so nothing specific to this behavior.
    Now, as a test, you might want to try ASIO4ALL, linked in the article above. Usually, it will get audio, where the Realtek, or Creative driver will not. Again, this is as a test, just to see if by-passing the Realtek driver will help. Do not forget to set the Audio Hardware ASIO to ASIO4ALL in Input and Output. Then test. If it has zero affect, then just uninstall it, and change the setting back.
    Good luck, and wish I had more to help,
    Hunt
    PS - other than mechanical/electrical things like the audio chip heating up and a connection failing, I just cannot think of something that would cause this behavior. Maybe download and run SpeedFan, a great little free utility, and monitor the temps for all components with sensors.

Maybe you are looking for