Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!
Ron, Elements can print standard size pictures, but it probably requires working with the images more than the other software you’ve used because it’s also more sophisticated. Most cameras don’t present an image that’s a "standard" size, and there’s variation, too, in terms of how big an image is when it comes from the camera. Elements doesn’t do much, if any, "guessing" about what you want; you have to tell it.
When we’ve had questions like this come up before on the forum, we’ve found it often works better if you post information about your image, such as the physical size when it comes from the camera and the resolution (most come in at 72ppi or 180ppi, for example), and then tell us what size print you want to make. Someone can then work with your example and give you step by step instructions for getting the size print you want. Once you get instructions for one, you’ll be able to adapt the method to other size pictures. And, we can tell you how to get two of them on one piece of paper, too!
Hmmm. That’s an interesting range you’ve got there. I’m not as good as others at immediately identifying why these images are coming out at various sizes, but we’ll work with images numbered two and three. I can’t duplicate the first one on my computer, and I have to be able to do that. Different camera settings? Different cameras? A typo?
Before doing anything else, make copies of all three of these images if you haven’t already. We’re going to work on the copies so you can archive the originals.
Open the second image file you listed, which is given as a 72ppi image measuring 31.778 X 23.778 inches. The 11.2 size indicates it’s probably already been converted to PSD format, or TIFF, but if not, you need to do that first. To check the format, go to File>Save As and see what’s listed for current format. If it’s anything besides Photoshop (PSD), choose that from the drop down list and click OK.
With the image open on your desktop, we’re going to play in the Image Resize box, so you can see how the Document Size of your picture changes as you adjust the resolution.
Go to Image>Resize>Image Size. Make sure there is NO checkmark in the box at the bottom next to Resample. Now we play.
In the box for Resolution, change the number from 72ppi to 380ppi. Your Document Size should have just changed from roughly 32 X 24 inches to 6.021 X 4.505. You’ll never be able to get an exact 4 X 6 using this method, because the aspect ratio of your camera won’t allow it. To get a perfect 4 X 6, you’ll have resize to the closest dimensions and then crop.
Now change the resolution to 320ppi. The Document Size just increased enough to allow you to crop to a perfect 5 X 7.
Last, change the resolution to 210ppi and you’ll be able to get an 8 X 10 print. See how that works? By manipulating the resolution of the image you can increase or decrease the Document Size.
Now go through a similar routine with the third file you listed. This appears to have either come from a different camera, or the settings were much different. With this image, I have to go down to 250ppi in order to get a 4 X 6; 205ppi to get a 5 X 7; and 130ppi to get an 8 X 10. The target range for prints from an inkjet printer is roughly 150ppi to 300ppi. An 8 X 10 from the third image falls below that range, so you might not be very pleased with the quality. For the most part, printing at a resolution above 300ppi is fine, unless it gets ridiculous. The optimal print resolution thing is another long discussion all by itself, so I won’t even go near that right now.
But your question was how to get a 4 X 6. Go back to the first image we played with (#2) and put it up on the monitor. Select the Crop Tool from the Toolbar (third row down on the right.) Once it’s selected, you’ll get some choices displayed in the Option Bar. Set your width to 6, your height to 4, and type in the resolution 380. Now click and drag on your image. You’ll get the famous marching ants outlining a perfect 4 X 6 rectangle. You can slide the box around so it encompasses the area in the photo you want to keep. Once you’re satisfied, go to Image>Crop. You now have a perfect 4 X 6 at 380ppi.
Now do the same thing with the second image (#3), but this time set the resolution to 250ppi. Now you have a second perfect 4 X 6.
You’ve presented us with an interesting challenge for the last part of your question – which was how to print two 4 X 6 pictures on one sheet of paper. The resolutions of the two you’ve just created are different. Printing two on one sheet requires they both have the same resolution. So, your choices are:
1. My favorite – don’t try to print these two at the same time! 🙂 Instead, choose another image that will natively resize to either 380ppi or 250ppi and print that one along with one of these.
2. Down sample the image at 380ppi to 250ppi.
3. Upsample the one at 250ppi to 380ppi (a really bad idea.)
4. Downsample the 380ppi image to 300ppi AND upsample the 250ppi image to 300ppi.
5. Run the sheet of paper through the printer twice – once for each print. I happen to do this quite a bit, and it works just fine with my printer. I don’t know what kind you use, though, so it might not be an option for you. There’s a risk of damage to the first print when it goes through the machine a second time.
Frankly I don’t like any of these choices besides the first one. Resampling images in either direction causes digital information to either be lost when extra pixels are thrown away if you downsample a 380ppi image to 300ppi, or else the software "makes up" pixels in order to increase the resolution from 250ppi to 300ppi. Generally, downsampling will do less harm to the image, providing you start out with a high resolution.
Let’s use my first choice – printing two images of the same resolution on one sheet of paper. You can wrestle with the challenge of printing images of different resolution at some other time.
Open a new blank document. (File>New or the New document icon right below the word File in the menu bar.) Set the size to 8 X 10, choose a resolution to match that of the images you want to print, and choose either a white or transparent background. Leave it open on your desktop.
Now open the two images you want to print. Select the Move tool, click on one picture and drag it to the new blank document. Now do the same thing with the second picture. Each will copy, so the originals can be safely closed. Use the Move tool to shift the pictures around on the new document until you’re happy with the placement. Now go to Print Preview and print!
There are a number of little details here that deserve more discussion, but this is too long already. Read through all of this, play around a little, and then feel free to repost for clarifications or with more questions. Good luck!
Oh, yeh, I was Miss Taylor’s star pupil in Typing! 🙂 Well, except for Sharon Covington. She could do 100wpm and not break a sweat. I could never get much above 80 – but neither could anybody else!
Wow!!! 80 wpm is incredibly good! I remember back in College, at the end of the class, we were expected to type at 28 wpm. Since then, and having worked with keyboards for the passed 16 years, I’ve been able to type at around 50 words per minute (1 word = 5 letters here). But that does includes typos and gramatical errors, otherwise, I’d be at 40… 😉
Of course that was also on a manual typewriter, which some of you have probably never seen outside of museums! 🙂
So, back in the olden days, typing tests were one of the things prospective employees gave to us young girls just out of high school who were after a clerical job. How is that done nowadays? Do they have computers set up to evaluate time and accuracy? Once I got my degree, nobody cared if I could type, although I sure wish I could have given tests of keyboarding skills to a couple of people I had working for me. They still had to use computers, and some of the stuff I got was truly pathetic.
Beth, you’re right about the manual typewriter! My high school graduation present was leading-edge technology for the time: a Smith-Corona portable electric typewriter! (I still have it….) Made a big difference for me in college… 🙂
I still have my Smith-Corona daisy wheel type-writter (white and grey). I kept it because it does look so old when compared to inkjet printer and word processors… It helped me during college time. Only the first year, actually, because after that, we had access to computers (using CP/M as an OS and FreeStyle as a word processor).
Good old times…
50 wpm is on a keyboard. On a typewritter, electric, I could do about 35-40, and on a manual typewritter (the test were given on a manual type writter), I barely did 30 words per minute. That’s, of course, with various cuts on my fingers 😉
Ray P.S. I just retested myself, I’m still at 50 words per minute! 426 characters, minus four typing mistakes (I dunno elsewhere, but here, one mistake = 1 word, or 5 characters). I know what I’ll do if I quit or loose my dayjob 😉
A few years ago my secretary wandered by my desk as I was typing a memo; she remarked that she was on her way to the civil service office (where they test for typing speed) and would ask them if they would change the definition of wpm for me … to "words per month". I politely asked her to check the job openings so she could get a clue as to where she might be employed the following week. It was all in good spirits, but I’ve never heard a word about my typing speed since … accuracy is near 100% … heck, at that speed I can spell-check on the fly.
When I retired in ’96 the school system I worked for was still giving "keyboard" tests. They were set up on a special computer just for the job!
I was a middle level administrator and, as such, never had a full time secretary so, my typing skills became, I think, much better out of necessity.
At any rate, when I took typing in the ninth grade I thought it was the worst course I had ever had…….47 years later I have a different perspective on it! 🙂
I took typing as an optionnal class. In College, here, you need to enroll in one optionnal class per semester, outside of your main subject. My main subject was computer programing, so I couldn’t take any class related to computer or admnistration (no CAD, no Lotus 1-2-3 or WordPerfect neither, and no accounting). In fact, arts and clerical work were my only two other options. At first I enrolled for the photography class.
The syllabus talked about processing our own pictures. I said "Cool, let’s have fun!". 5 minutes after the beginning of the class, I realized the teacher was frustrated by Life itself, and that we were to work in B&W only. Sorry, not to insult anyone here, I just hate B&W (comes from my childhood when all my friends had color TV and we still had a B&W one… lol!). Anyway, I abandonned the class and jumped in the typing class.
My other options involved Clay modeling (oh yeah, that sounded as much fun as it smelled…), Acting (I’m extremely shy and I can barely breath in front of anyone else, now speaking was totally out of the question…), German Level II (I already had one bad experience with German I, and I’m no sadistic guy), Chemistry (again, bad prior experience when a teacher in 4th high school grade dropped accidentaly a big piece of sodium in a medium sized water thank… it exploded about 6 feet in front of me… never liked adventure afterwards), and English (I was rejected because I was too advanced for the opened class).
Keeping those other choices in mind, I realized typing was a very good experience.. 😉
When I started my working life as an assistant chartered accountant it was not done to have any typing skills. This typing was done by usually good looking women with the ability to decipher male handwriting. It always struck me that the female boss of this typing room always looked less pretty and never seemed to be married.
My first encounter with a keyboard was in 1991 when I had to publish my diary of a pilgrimage from the notes I took on the way. Ever since people are rather amused to see me work the keyboard like I’m playing "quatre mains" with just only two fingers. 😉
I later got what I was wishing for, a friend and I had a small variety shop and we acquired a Kiss machine to process films (C-41 I think it was). I learned how to process my own pictures there, in full color 😉
Ray
Ah, Ray…..you should have taken that black & white photography class! If only I had had that opportunity… 🙂
I dunno… it’s kind of… well, old. I mean, old in the wrong sense. I’m sure there must something to it because it wouldn’t get discussed here at length as it is every once in a while. But to me, there’s just no appeal. However, I fully respect those who like it. I’ll even participate in any challenge that would envolve B&W pictures (probably try to colorize it… haha!)
Ray, I would go to an exhibit of black & white over color anytime – but that’s a personal preference. I would like to be able to take decent b&w’s, but that’s beyond me at this point.
If b&w is so difficult, how come color isn’t more difficult, you got millions of colors to balance as opposed to b&w… I’m telling you, I just don’t get the point.
If b&w is so difficult, how come color isn’t more difficult, you got millions of colors to balance as opposed to b&w… I’m telling you, I just don’t get the point.
Ray, I really think B&W photography is a completely separate art form. Thirty years ago, I used to set up a darkroom in the bathroom in our house and develop and print B&W images. Some of the prints I made of our kids are among the most treasured pictures we have. I had two cameras back then…both 35mm SLR’s…one with B&W film, one with Kodachrome slides. I still have all my old slides, going back to 1960 and before, but somehow I lost a shoebox full of B&W film strips, which has given me great sorrow. All you have to do is look at some of Ansel Adams images of Yosemite to realize that B&W photography can be a real art form. It eliminates the "distraction" of color and forces the photographer (and the viewer) to concentrate on composition, shapes and textures. I love it, and may get back to it someday. Bert
Bert, good answer. I would only add that it also makes you concentrate on tone (shade of gray) in addition to composition, shape and texture. It’s amazing to me how removing the color from a photo reveals the underlying tones, often to the detriment of the photo because two very different colors may be of the same shade of gray. Learning how to ‘see’ in grayscale and compose an image taking tone into account is a real challenge.
Re; B & W ‘s…..I got to thinking about b&w images and looked at some I took with my 35mm Canon back before I went digital ;)….i came to the conclusion that the best ones were the ones with one subject matter and little else to distract with an even ‘flow’ of black/white and greyscale. I decided to look through some of my old Kodak color images to find one that i could transform from boring in color to better in b&w. I have come to the conclusion that indeed ‘simple’ color images make for better black and whites. I probably could have found a better image to work with but my taste tells me the b&w looks more appealing. What do you think ?
Jodi, very nice! In the color photo, the vivid color of the shirt draws attention away from the face; in the grayscale version, the shirt recedes into similar tones in the background and the face becomes more of a focal point. At least to my untrained eye…
Jodi, you managed to put into words (and pictures!) what I spent some time trying to articulate last evening. I didn’t post the message, because I could never get it worded in a way that made sense. To me, in some instances, the color can detract from an image. The picture of your daughter is one example, and I’d just been working on another. A couple of days ago, I was playing with a color photo my son had taken of his kitten a couple of years ago, which was adorable. I wanted to do a tiny 2 X 3 stocking stuffer, and after working with the color picture for a while, I decided to experiment. I cloned out virtually all of the background detail and blurred what was left, and then I took out the color. The simple image in black and white makes the viewer focus on the subject – e.g. your daughter and the kitten. The eye isn’t drawn to the green of the grass or other non-relevant items. The grass in your color picture adds nothing, but the brilliance of the color is distracting.
And, Ray, I did essentially the same thing with your squirrel, and it turned out pretty good!
I can’t be convinced about B&W, as hard as I’d try to, I just don’t like this form of photography. For me, color vibrates, it indicates life. B&W is static, almost dead. Sorry… 🙁
You know, Ray, I would agree with that about Jodi’s image. To me, in this case, the color image is lively, soft and appealing, while the b&W is just clinical, detached, like something a news photog would shoot. Just my opinion.
As for B&W generally, I’m not as opposed to it as Ray, but I do think that waaay too much of the time B&W images say more about how clever and artistic the photog thinks s/he is than about the subject.
As for B&W generally, I’m not as opposed to it as Ray, but I do think that waaay too much of the time B&W images say more about how clever and artistic the photog thinks s/he is than about the subject
Well, I sort-of agree with that, Barb. I think a color photo can be interesting by itself, without much artistic input. A beautiful nature shot…blue sky, verdant greens, etc. To make that picture effective in B&W requires a lot more input…and effort. And, as Chuck says, you have to develop an ability to "see" in B&W…something I never mastered. I think it is a valid art form…just as charcoal sketches are as valid as oil paintings. Bert
Well I just got back from last minute shopping for wrapping paper and odds and ends….it’s crazy out there !!! It’s also raining and kind of warm so could be worse for sure.
YES, I do believe B&W photography IS a form of ‘art’ in photography. I do believe an artist has that right to express him or herself whichever way they want. I could go on and on about my opinion on this but it wouldn’t mean much.
Well it’s already Christmas here! So merry christmas everyone! (number one child woke up at 4am with a headache and temperature so I’ve been up a while! Every one else is now back to sleep) I like good black and white potography – for some reason all the photographic images that have affected me emotionally the strongest have been B&W. I suspect it’s to do with the way different people react psycologically to colour.
I’ve done very little B&W myself – I find it difficult to see how an image will turn out when I’m first looking at a scene . I have used black and white, or more commonly duotone to rescue an otherwise attractive image where some aspect of the colour was distracting or jarring. But I’ve never done any shooting jus twith B&W in mind. I guess I should turn my camera into black and white mode for a day and see what happens!
Susan, one caution re using black and white mode: I believe you’ll lose the RGB channel information that can be used in post-processing to make the greyscale image more powerful. Even if you convert the image to RGB, I believe you’ll find that all three RGB channels are identical. Of course, you’ll still be able to do curves and gradient maps, but the other techniques are rendered ineffective.
Chuck
p.s. Merry Christmas! We still have 9 1/2 shopping hours to go here…:-)
Chuck – yes your right. but I was thinking that a day of looking at the real world as presented in monochrome through the LCD on my camera might give me some idea of what works and what doesn’t. But of course by using RGB images from the camera and then converting them it gives a much bigger choice of conversion to B&W rather than the single choice (perhaps modified by filters) that a B&W film gives. I presume that the B&W setting on my G3 gives a similar reponse as a film would….. (I must say that other than a single tryout to see whether the menu worked when I first got the camera, my G3 has never been off the standard image settings – when you have Elements it’s much easier to do all this saturation/contarst B&W and sepia etc adjustmetn in post processing) Susan S.
A good link indeed. Nevertheless I would like to add a few words in favour of shooting and previsualising in B&W instead of colour.
B&W is not a solution for images that won’t work in clour. Sometimes it may be a way of rescueing images, but a B&W image usually "lives" because of contrasts in tone. This tonal difference is mostly caused by lighting constrasts.
Shooting B&W is probably the best way to train your eye for contrasts in lighting. As soon as you are able to see the various tonal values of your subject, you will start to improve both your B&W and Colour photography. Understanding tonal contrasts is one of the main keys to better photography.
You can train your eyes for monochrome images by looking at your subject through your eyelashes. Another way is attaching a red filter to your SLR lens or holding in front of the viewfinder of your camera.
Bert, that "someone" is absolutely right! Probably you may need some coaching, but everyone can make progression. We cannot all be Olympic medaillists, but with some training and coaching we al can come to a certain level, much higher than we ever expected.
I’m not extremely gifted as well, but with perseverance and some good coaches who pushed me into the right direction I’ve managed to come quite far; much further than I ever dreamed of. Moreover, each year I’m able to improve myself considerably.
You can train your eyes for monochrome images by looking at your subject through your eyelashes
Some years ago, Zone VI Studios, run by the late Fred Picker, used to sell filters designed to assist in visualizing B & W images. Zone VI was sold to Calumet Photo so maybe they still offer them. I still have mine but haven’t used it for quite a while. The idea was to hold it up to the eye and see all the color washed out of the scene, to be replaced by various shades of yellow. Also helped to mentally crop the image.
I have a question on restoring Photoshop Elements 2 preferences defaults. Page 33 of the PSE2 manual says how to this: In Windows, press and hold Alt+Control+Shift immediately after launching PE. The Click Yes to delete the PS settings file.
However it wasn’t clear exactly when to do the Alt+Control+Shift. I tried it at various times: just after the Welcome Screen appears, just after I close the Welcome Screen, just after I double-click the PE icon to boot, and during the boot process while the fonts and other things are loading. But I can never get the Yes button to come up.
Try holding the three keys down simultaneously and continue to hold and then launch the program. Let them up when you get the dialog box with a question, answer yes and let the program load.
Or, you can burrow down in your hard drive and find the Preference folder manually and drag in to the Recycle Bin. Do a Find for "Elements Preference" and it’ll probably turn up. I know where all of the preference folders are located in Macs, but I don’t know where Windows stores them.
Getting that key combo can be tricky. I usually have the fingers of my left hand on all three keys before I click on the start up icon for Elements. That way I’m ready to go right away.
Each thread has a name. If you posted a new Topic, look for it under the title you gave it. If you posted it somewhere else and don’t remember the name of that thread, do a search of the Elements forum using your own name as the search criteria. You’ll find it that that.
Cool! Now that you mention it, I did find that one time and I’d forgotten. But if she can’t find her post, I’m not sure how she’ll find her name. I’m not sure how she’ll find my instructions on how to find her post, as a matter of fact! 🙂
Help!! I have a book "Adobe PHE2 Hands-On-Training, and one of the lessons is a video file which shows how to use Adjust Backlighting to darken a sky with minimal affect on the rest of the picture. Here are the steps: 1. duplicate the Background layer of the original picture. 2. hide the Background Copy layer (click the eye icon). 3. select the original Background layer. 4. darken sky using Adjust Backlighting tool. 5. make Background Copy layer visible (click eye) and select this layer. 6. select Blending Mode of Darken (which I assume is supposed to merge the darkened sky with the original non-sky portions). 7. toggling the visibility of the Background Copy Layer then shows the effect of the Blending.
My problem is with step 7. In the video the toggling clearly shows the difference between blending and no blending. However when I toggle there is no change. In fact, the result I get after Blending is the same as if I had not used layers at all but just did the Adjust Backlighting from the original picture. I watched the video about 10 times and carefully reproduced each step, but I cannot get the Blending to work as shown in the video. Any ideas, anyone?
Mark, why don’t you start a new thread for your question? We have some people who I’m sure could help you, but this thread is getting kind of old (and addresses a different subject), and people might not check it if they think the original topic has been exhausted. Besides, it will make it easier for somebody else to do a search if they have a similar question. But come back!!!! 🙂
Help!! OK, OK, I’m a tad weird, I cannot find a way to add a border to my prints in Elements2 (Simple in E1)anyone care to brighten my day with some help? Thanks, Hugh
I run version 1, but I would think that all you need do is resize the canvas to allow for the margin area and choose to have the image placed in the center of this enlarged canvas. If that doesn’t fly, you could create a new file (image size plus border allowances) at the same resolution as your image and then just drag the image from the layers palette and drop it on the new file (with Shift key depressed for automatic centering).
Hugh, What I often do for borders is to size the image a little smaller than the final canvas, and then open a new canvas of the size I want for the final photo and give it a fill color…then drag the image onto it. That way, I can control the width and color of the border. Just one more of the thousand ways to do it…. Bert
Thanks for the help, but when I try to get to Stroke on the Edit menu it is faint, not working. Must be an additional step in there some place. (I know I’m slow, too long as a darkroom rat for digital work!) Hugh
Hugh, good higher res images for print need some extra pixels to make a stroke border appear properly. In the stroke dialogue box you can experiment with pixel sizes….depending on how thick you want the line. 5 px for high res images is a good number to start with….you may want more or less so be sure to ‘test’ your strokes on a new blank layer.
Thanks mucho, I finally did it. First I had to figure out that when you said "selection", you didn;t mean "did I choose a print" THEN I had to learn that to put a line around the outside of the print, I had to select "INSIDE!" I will NEVER catch on to digital speak. Again thanks ladies, if you two weren’t so married and I wasn’t 30 years too old I"d probably hit on you both. Hugh
