Close
This post has a child post. (post #402188)

« Previous Next » This post is #11 in the Kantoku Self Select Calendar 2013 pool.

Search
Tags
Statistics
Options
Related Posts




5_nenme_no_houkago calendar kantoku kurumi_(kantoku) thighhighs

Edit | Respond

aoie emesai
about 12 years ago
hey twin are you saving these as 16-bit images instead of 8-bit? They are awfully huge in filesize. Also make a pool for them too.

Probably reduce your noise reduction a bit, I personally think it's a bit strong.
Twinsenzw
about 12 years ago
aoie_emesai said:
hey twin are you saving these as 16-bit images instead of 8-bit? They are awfully huge in filesize. Also make a pool for them too.

Probably reduce your noise reduction a bit, I personally think it's a bit strong.
I think it is in 8-bit, I was wondering why it's so big as well :-(
(trying to save it as 16-bit, get a bigger one )
I will check the config on my scanner again
KilladeKill
about 12 years ago
wwheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee -^^- KURUMIIIIIII -^^-
i just love Kantoku's art
Twinsenzw
about 12 years ago
Twinsenzw said:
I think it is in 8-bit, I was wondering why it's so big as well :-(
(trying to save it as 16-bit, get a bigger one )
I will check the config on my scanner again
my scanner: epson v33, close all filters(no color correction), image type is 24bit-color <--is this why the file is so big? There is a color-smooth image type in the config, not sure about if I should choose this image type...
fireattack
about 12 years ago
Its filesize is ok, 54MB is just because of its big size. I can re-compressed it to 48.4MB but not too much difference.

What I recommend: resize it to ~450dpi before you filter them. and as aoie said, use a weaker fitler. It's now very big but doesnt have that much 'infomation' which it should have in this size; it's blurry like it has been gauss blurred strongly..
Twinsenzw
about 12 years ago
fireattack said:
Its filesize is ok, 54MB is just because of its big size. I can re-compressed it to 48.4MB but not too much difference.

What I recommend: resize it to ~450dpi before you filter them. and as aoie said, use a weaker fitler. It's now very big but doesnt have that much 'infomation' which it should have in this size; it's blurry like it has been gauss blurred strongly..
-dt 55, -p 0.4, -a 0.4, -alpha 1, -sigma 1, -gauss 0.1, -iter 1 on raws
and neatimage on stockings & other dark areas to remove noise.
I will try put 0 on -gauss and reduce -alpha
aoie emesai
about 12 years ago
at that dpi a bit of guass is okay, though normally i never exceed .6 or .7, but even so i set my contour to around 1.1 - 1.2 to preserve detail and i just baby step my way into donoising the rest. On heavy texture areas or areas you want a strong filter, you should put your iteration to 2 or 3 and spatial step to 2 or 3.

Don't forget to use masks.
fireattack
about 12 years ago
-0.1 guass doesnt affect anything. But -p 0.4, -a 0.4, -alpha 1 is heavy as hell. It may look well on 600dpi i don't know, but I believe a 600dpi image with that heavy filter would result in much less detailed than a 400dpi-weak-filtered one and the excessive amounts of pixels did nothing here.
crim
about 12 years ago
I found filtering many times weakly on 300dpi is better than filtering few times heavily on 600dpi.
Though gauss .2 ~ .3 should be added for bicubic or lanczos resizing. Because they sharpen images and add noises when resizing.