presenting wedding images issue

C

cpw

Suspended / Banned
Messages
89
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi there,

Shot a Wedding yesterday in raw with 5d mkii. Edited them now but the image files are huge and would be an issue to give them on DVD which is what I have promised.

Can you lower the file sizes and give the client the photos so they are more manageable ? There are 330 at present and just 1 image converted to jpeg was 60mb.

Any ideas on how you presnt finished wedding images digitally please?
Thanks
 
JPG - but reduce the quality to 90%. It reduces the file size massively without making a noticeable difference to quality.

60mb sounds very very large. Are you resizing up as well?
 
Thank you for the advice. I basically shot the whole wedding in RAW. Uploaded all the images to my mac hard drive, added them to my lightroom catalog from there and then edited them inside lightroom unless there were more creative things I wanted to add in photoshop.

These files were converted by lightroom to jpeg when I pressed export so I have done nothing to the size of the image at all. In fact, I thought I may have to convert the images from RAW first so that I could have a folder with all the jpegs in to give to the client but it did this for me.

Im sure there is a better more streamlined way of doing this but I havent perfected it yet.

Maybe you have a suggestion on which way around I should do things after the wedding has been shot?

I have a 1tb hard drive, Mac computer, lightroom 3 and CS5 if this helps.

Thanks again for the reply
 
Seems you have the basics of a reasonable workflow worked out. I'm a little confused as to why you get 60mb JPEGS out of LR though, I suspect you must be doing something. But try setting quality to 90 when you export.

I've just tried it ( using a MK iii) file and can't get over 14mb jpeg. Can you screenshot your export settings
 
I have been using the TP gallery and the restrictions on that are < 200kb and max of 800 pixels for any one side (I think).

Whilst digital images of this (small) size are no good for producing prints (I think) they are ok for viewing on a pc (and I guess the same applies to a television (say).
 
Dpi? What colour space are you using?

As said post your export settings and I can check against mine. I have. 5d mk3 and don't get that big
 
Byker28i said:
Dpi? What colour space are you using?

As said post your export settings and I can check against mine. I have. 5d mk3 and don't get that big
Click to expand...

DPI has no effect on number of pixels in an image, which is what effects image size
 
I just checked after reading the responses here and its the pixels that are 60.2m

The file size of image 1 is width 3744, height 5616, resolution 240 which gives me a jpeg at 9.8mb.

So my next question is I have 330 images at the moment of the wedding and it seems a little excessive in size to be able to present the original files on a dvd/CD so they can print or share whenever they like.

Would saving the files at 90% make it feasible to fit onto a dvd? or is there another way that I could downsize them whilst thinking about the possibility that they will probably print all the images meaning they will have to be of a good quality.

thanks guys
 
I have just tried entering the following pixels height 3506 width 2337 which is roughly what my old canon 20d gave me (remember that this is from dimensions 5616 height and 3744 width created by the 5d mkii), and I have ended up at a file size of 4.3mb which is much more manageable.

Trouble is, is this too much? and will it compromise the quality of the image as a print?
 
DPI has no effect on number of pixels in an image, which is what effects image size
Click to expand...


If you resample an image by changing just the resolution (PPI) it will affect both the number of pixels and file size.

Colin
 
I had the impression that if you keep the resolution as is e.g. 240, then you can reduce the pixels and the quality will still remain high.

If you reduce the resolution to say 150 from 240, this would indeed reduce the pixels and the file size but for prints I should imagine it would suffer.

Is this theory right? if so, is it feasible to lower the pixels to the size mentioned before and give the clients these instead of the huge originals that I will of course hold on to?
 
Spuriousfish said:
If you resample an image by changing just the resolution (PPI) it will affect both the number of pixels and file size.

Colin
Click to expand...

no it won't DPI is purely a printing measure, it has no effect on the actual number of pixels in an image. Neither does it effect file size.

Heres a screen shot to show you. Same image, same export parameters just different DPI. Notice the file sizes are exactly the same.

Screen-Shot-2013-08-25-at-18_13_55.jpg


cpw said:
I had the impression that if you keep the resolution as is e.g. 240, then you can reduce the pixels and the quality will still remain high.

If you reduce the resolution to say 150 from 240, this would indeed reduce the pixels and the file size but for prints I should imagine it would suffer.

Is this theory right? if so, is it feasible to lower the pixels to the size mentioned before and give the clients these instead of the huge originals that I will of course hold on to?
Click to expand...

Its not correct. DPI is a printing measure only. You can reduce the number of pixels by either lowering the quality or limiting the size of the image. But DPI won't affect this
 
Last edited:
cpw said:
I just checked after reading the responses here and its the pixels that are 60.2m

The file size of image 1 is width 3744, height 5616, resolution 240 which gives me a jpeg at 9.8mb.

So my next question is I have 330 images at the moment of the wedding and it seems a little excessive in size to be able to present the original files on a dvd/CD so they can print or share whenever they like.

Would saving the files at 90% make it feasible to fit onto a dvd? or is there another way that I could downsize them whilst thinking about the possibility that they will probably print all the images meaning they will have to be of a good quality.

thanks guys
Click to expand...

reducing it to 90% quality is probably the best way to do this
 
Changing PPI, to be exact, will affect the pixel dimensions in a resampled image. Just try it in Photoshop and you'll see it's so.


The relationship is as follows:-

Physical Size = Pixel Dimensions / Resolution.

Change one value and the others change accordingly. E.g Lower resolution, bigger print; Less Pixels smaller print.

Keeping the same physical size and changing the resolution results in a change of pixel dimensions. Since this is done by resampling you may run the risk of changing the quality of the image but if its just a small amount you'll probably not notice the difference.

File size is proportional to Pixel Dimensions.

Lowering the resolution does technically affect the quality of the image. You have to determine at what point it becomes unacceptable.

Colin
 
Spuriousfish said:
Changing PPI, to be exact, will affect the pixel dimensions in a resampled image. Just try it in Photoshop and you'll see it's so.

The relationship is as follows:-

Physical Size = Pixel Dimensions / Resolution.

Change one value and the others change accordingly. E.g Lower resolution, bigger print; Less Pixels smaller print.

Keeping the same physical size and changing the resolution results in a change of pixel dimensions. Since this is done by resampling you may run the risk of changing the quality of the image but if its just a small amount you'll probably not notice the difference.

File size is proportional to Pixel Dimensions.

Lowering the resolution does technically affect the quality of the image. You have to determine at what point it becomes unacceptable.

Colin
Click to expand...

You'll have noticed of course, before typing that I referred consistently to DPI and never so much as mentioned PPI. Didn't you?

As repeatedly said DPI has no effect on image size
 
Last edited:
Great responses and I understand now.

Not entirely sure how to reduce the images to 90% though.If this is the best way to do it, can I create an action that will do all 330 images and put them into a new folder ready for sending off?

I know how to create an action but if you can just explain the 90% reduction to a single file, I can then put this into practice.

Thanks
 
cpw said:
Great responses and I understand now.

Not entirely sure how to reduce the images to 90% though.If this is the best way to do it, can I create an action that will do all 330 images and put them into a new folder ready for sending off?

I know how to create an action but if you can just explain the 90% reduction to a single file, I can then put this into practice.

Thanks
Click to expand...

It's an option when you export to jpeg from light room
 
If you come down to 70-80% in the export options in lightroom you'll be hard put to tell the difference between that and 100%.
60mb still seems large for a jpeg though, even from a 5d3.
 
I have just exported a 36 Mb D800 RAW file from LR5 as a jpg with 100% quality. The image is of tree and is full of detail resulting in a large jpg. The dimensions are 7360 x 4920 and I get a file size of 14.4 Mb.

I think you must be upscaling the images on export.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top