tacit flint
Until now I never view a guide about adding an image with a different resolution than the base resolution of the background I always struggled with that, for this one I transform it with CTRL + T shrink down and shrink it and extend it back for the resolution and make it more "pixelate". Even with the method I use something look "off". All help is appreciate, thanks.
*
1 is the base resolution
2 is with the method I used
Thx for your reading
stark walrus
You absolutely need to have both resolution (base image + composite) close enough for it to work.
Even then resolution is a bit the wrong idea. You need to have both pixel counts close enough (To be honest resolution in itself only matters if you print)
Pixel count is what it is: You can increase it, but it will always be fake, because when you increase it, Photoshop only tries to invent pixels from nothing. So it's not supposed to be exact. Some method gives a good aproximation (I use the "enhance" function in Camera Raw, with good results) but don't expect miracles.
If you can have both images close to each others in terms of size (pixels) then you should be OK
Things that also help:
The bottom line is that resolution isn't really important, unless you print.
1200 pixels at 300 dpi and 1200 pixels at 72 dpi is still 1200 pixels.
The 300 dpi will print smaller, hence will look sharper.
If you want good quality results, choose a higher pixel count (something like 3000 px gives plenty of leeway to work on for most digital work, but it really depends on the final artwork)
tacit flint
You absolutely need to have both resolution (base image + composite) close enoug...
Thx about your help !
My point was I use base image that is lower of pixel count than my composite, how can I adapt my composite image to match the base image pixel count or be close enough to seems "real"
half bluffBOT
Gave +1 Creative Carma to @stark walrus (current: #8 - 665)
stark walrus
Thx about your help !
My point was I use base image that is lower of pixel count...
You can go to image>image size and type in the pixel size in there. You'll have to check "resample" for it to work as intended.
To be honest, it's still not ideal, but I know sometimes there is nothing you can do
That's why it's best to get images directly from a hi quality camera or stock photography websites, when possible.
One thing: you need to consider the size in pixel of the subject you are compositing. That means if the the person you are trying to composite onto the trucks is initially part of a much larger image, you need to take into account the size of the guy, not the size of the whole photo.
It's important if for example the person is within a much larger photo
And there is no rule nor there is exact numbers for that, you need to run some tests.
tacit flint
You can go to` image`>`image size` and type in the pixel size in there. You'll h...
Thank you all is clear I will try that later theses days !
Have a good day
half bluffBOT
Gave +1 Creative Carma to @stark walrus (current: #8 - 666)
tacit flint
You can go to` image`>`image size` and type in the pixel size in there. You'll h...
this modify the whole image ? if yes there is no way to apply that only for a layer ?
stark walrus
this modify the whole image ? if yes there is no way to apply that only for a la...
You can still transform it after having converted it into a smart object. (CTRL+T)
It works well that way.
Make sure you got the proper sampling method in the preferences (edit>preferences)
tacit flint
You can still transform it after having converted it into a smart object. (CTRL+...
thx again will try
half bluffBOT
Gave +1 Creative Carma to @stark walrus (current: #8 - 667)