Jpg File Does Not Show Up In Photosuite

[WANLord]

I seem to be having a problem with getting a .jpg file to open up in PhotoSuite. I scanned a 4X6 photo with my Epson 845 AIO using the EpsonScan sw at 4800dpi and a jpg compression level of 1. This results in a jpg file of 18588X28276 pixels and 217MB in size. There is sufficient RAM in the system (8GB) to accomplish the file open and PhotoSuite does appear to open the file and shows one file open but the image displayed onscreen is nothing but whitespace, no image. I need to know how to correct this so I can work on the file.

[cdanteek]

I seem to be having a problem with getting a .jpg file to open up in PhotoSuite. I scanned a 4X6 photo with my Epson 845 AIO using the EpsonScan sw at 4800dpi and a jpg compression level of 1. This results in a jpg file of 18588X28276 pixels and 217MB in size. There is sufficient RAM in the system (8GB) to accomplish the file open and PhotoSuite does appear to open the file and shows one file open but the image displayed onscreen is nothing but whitespace, no image. I need to know how to correct this so I can work on the file.

 

I can't find a calculator above 600 DPI and using that and your pixels the pic is this big.

 

Do you see the problem?

 

[sknis]

Those settings (above ca 600) are what you need for slide or for film negative use. There is no need to go above 600. What are you trying to do with the image? Do you have a printer to do almost a 4 foot width?

[WANLord]

The intended purpose of this venture is to produce an 8.5X11 borderless print in as high a resolution as is possible. Using the Sultan of Snide's calculations 18588 pixels divided by a 4800dpi resolution should yield a width of 3.875 inches and 28276 divided by 4800 dpi should yield a height of 5.89083333333333 inches. So why does the sw fail to display the image again?

[cdanteek]

Post the jpg or a similar one same pixels and dpi, on a free hosting site that won't change it when uploaded. Then we can download it and test opening it in our C2012 Photosuite.

[Brendon]

The intended purpose of this venture is to produce an 8.5X11 borderless print in as high a resolution as is possible. Using the Sultan of Snide's calculations 18588 pixels divided by a 4800dpi resolution should yield a width of 3.875 inches and 28276 divided by 4800 dpi should yield a height of 5.89083333333333 inches. So why does the sw fail to display the image again?

 

Your sarcasm is duly noted.

I think what the Guru was trying to suggest without insulting you is that Photosuite won't handle resolutions higher than 600 dpi, however that seems to have been too subtle?

 

For your assistance, here is a screenshot of a page from the Photosuite help system showing the resolution settings available to you in Photosuite. The maximum is 600 dpi.

 

 

This would explain "why does the sw fail to display the image again" when the image is at 4800 dpi.

 

I fear your venture at 4800 dpi is doomed to failure.

[WANLord]

Brendon;

 

Many thanks for the Help system reference. I guess this built-in limitation in the sw serves to preclude the possibility of running out of RAM or forcing page file swaps. Perhaps the sw engineers will address this issue in a later release of the sw as the OS and TWAIN are both capable of supporting much higher resolutions. The photo under consideration was an eventual candidate for my Epson photo printer which does 13"x19" and I also was considering it as a candidate for a 24"x30" poster print, so it was my intention to utilize the highest possible resolution throughout this shot's progression to posterhood. Sarcasm retracted with great contrition.

[WANLord]

Your sarcasm is duly noted.

I think what the Guru was trying to suggest without insulting you is that Photosuite won't handle resolutions higher than 600 dpi, however that seems to have been too subtle?

 

For your assistance, here is a screenshot of a page from the Photosuite help system showing the resolution settings available to you in Photosuite. The maximum is 600 dpi.

 

 

This would explain "why does the sw fail to display the image again" when the image is at 4800 dpi.

 

I fear your venture at 4800 dpi is doomed to failure.

 

Brendon;

 

I fear you are correct, however I was able to get the image to open properly in PhotoSuite at 2400dpi by removing all the backlight correction and unsharp mask settings from the EpsonScan sw. My fear is that if I use 600dpi for the 8.5X11 it will look good but will pixelate noticeably when expanded to 24X30. We'll see. Sam's club charges $10.87 for a 24X30 poster so I guess this is the cheapest way to find out if my suspicions are correct.

[grandpabruce]

Brendon;

 

I fear you are correct, however I was able to get the image to open properly in PhotoSuite at 2400dpi by removing all the backlight correction and unsharp mask settings from the EpsonScan sw. My fear is that if I use 600dpi for the 8.5X11 it will look good but will pixelate noticeably when expanded to 24X30. We'll see. Sam's club charges $10.87 for a 24X30 poster so I guess this is the cheapest way to find out if my suspicions are correct.

 

Perhaps Adobe Lightroom coupled with Adobe PhotoShop would meet your needs. But, you won't get either one of them for $79.99.

[sknis]

Why do you have to do anything with the files? Just put them on a storage device and take them to Sam's Club.

 

Hint; There are several places on line that will print a poster. Go to one of those and point to the inage and to the size you want. The site will tell you if the resolution is too low for a proper print at that size. I do that all the time. Just search for Photo Poster Prints. Shutterfly and Snapfish are typical of such company/site but there are others.

[d_deweywright]

Well, if we say you're going to blow up your 4x6 print to 24x30, then you'll be reducing your dpi by a factor of 6. So, 2400 dpi becomes 400 dpi, or 2.5 mils per pixel. Those are still pretty small pixels for the human eye. If we consider most monitors are 96 dpi, or just over 10 mils each, your poster resolution will still be about 4 times better than what you see on a monitor. I doubt you'll have too many complaints about pixelation.