Hi Fred.  Thanks for the info.  I think we are saying the same thing but you're saying it better.  I guess my goal is to have one basic copy of an image just like any other photographer, and from that image be able to enlarge it to whatever dimension I need.  In my case what one client may want as 17" x 72", another client may want as 36" by 400", or wherever the math works out.

I had previously believed that in order to do that I would have to save multiple versions of the same picture at each size increment required.  This uses memory on my computer and using Photoshop at least saving a file at 36" x 400" makes for a huge file.  But if I can simply take that same file and use QI to set the print size to whatever I need it saves some of the frustration I have been causing myself. 

Oh, yes I do get a file.  I generally just save it as an IBM TIFF if I intend to use QI for the print job.  JPEG would be nice but Mike mentioned that over a certain file size JPEG does not work.  Although from what you said previous the type of TIFF no longer matters so that's easier.
Thanks

So re-reading this and some other threads and taking some time to watch the tutorials again I have a couple questions.  One I think I know the answer to already but want to check.  As you know by reading this thread I print some very long images and have experienced some issues seemingly related to file size.  When I adjust the image size in photoshop (I know thats not the actual fact of whats happening) it also changes the size of the file itself.  If I do all my scaling in photoshop, write down what print size equates to the scale I need, and save the original un-enlarged version, this results in a smaller file size.  It seems like I can then take that smaller sized file and use QI to handle my enlarging.  This seems like it would avoid the issues I was causing myself earlier.  Is this an accurate understanding?

Second, I have just purchased an Epson 9900 so I may print backdrops up to 44" in height.  From earlier explanations I am assuming that 200 ppi will still work just fine while keeping file size manageable.  That would be great. 

I am also wondering if more RAM would make any difference in the functioning of the program. So far it has not turned out that RAM was ever my issue in the first place and I think I have seen threads where Mike said it doesn't always make much of a difference.

Thanks

Hi Fred,

Thanks for the response.  Sometimes frustration gets the better of us and we lash out at the easy target.  In this case a defenseless computer program.  I will try to be nicer in my moments of stupidity.

So in the name of learning something here.  I read the part about Alpha Channels so I guess I had something else wrong.  However, while removing the alpha channel I must have also fixed the underlying problem.  Don't know what was different other than this image had originally been saved in layers while I was still working on it.

I know you have asked me a few times why not just use QI for all my process thereby solving some of my problems.  So here is what I do.  From what I have seen QI cannot do all the things I need.  I have watched most of the tutorials that seemed to apply to my process but I could be wrong on this count. 

I make backgrounds for model railroads.  They are usually quite long with the longest being 55 feet but I hope to do longer. (This is where QI was meant to be used and has with some user error been successful.)  The process starts as any pano would.  I take a series of images across my scene with overlap on each frame, usually about 20%.  I then take these images into Photoshop and use the stitching functions to put them together.  Then there is some cropping to get a rectangular shape.  After that I have to worry about the scale of the objects appearing in the image.  For example, a car is usually about 4-5 feet tall.  Well, if that car appears ten feet tall relative to my customer's trains or other scenery its just not going to work.  So, using the ruler tool in photoshop I adjust the overall size of the image until that car appears the proper scale height.  As everything is generally about the same distance, if I scale one element of the image then all elements change proportionally.   Scale is very important to my customers, an object can appear smaller than scale, suggesting a depth to the image, but never bigger.

Normally this is end of the process.  I now have a scaled backdrop and an enlargement size that results in the equivalent scale.  Thus I know that at 17" x 72" the objects in said image will be to the scale desired.  Sometimes, like yesterday, a client wants more than one image put together and merged.  I can usually do this using the clone stamp and some creative editing.  Often it also results in completely removing  one or both skies and replacing them with another as the shade for each sky is unlikely to match.  Easily done with a smooth horizon but when branches stick up into the sky it becomes a lot more tricky.  Usually these branches get some creative pruning.  Finally when all this is done and the image is the size my customer needs I can flatten it, save it, and print it.

There is likely a better way to do what I am trying but I have not found it yet.  It may well be that QI can do all these things for me but it is tough to change from what one knows.  If it can and it will improve my process I will spend the time learning to do it.  I have invested a lot of time and money in this little business and it may actually show a payoff.  I am actually purchasing an Epson 9900 this week in order to make taller backgrounds and the 4880 can only go to 17".

As far as QI goes it is a good program, even if I do get a bit frustrated with it.  I use it a lot for another side of my business, making small kits of buildings and stuff for cutting out.  QI places these image on the roll paper very efficiently and saves me a lot of paper.  I also use it to print wedding photos for a couple of local photographers.  Works great for this again although they have done their own color corrections and stuff.  I just tell it what size to print their images.  In fact after showing another friend how easy the program was for printing wedding images and similar I think he has been convinced to buy a copy. 

So I guess I solved my own problem.  Out of curiosity I opened the file info page for this file and for another larger one I did last week.  The only difference I could find is the problem file had an Alpha Channel.  I don't really know what that is but I am guessing that when I saved the original with the layers still separate, as I was not done working on it, it must have saved differently than normal.  I went in photoshop, re-saved it, unchecking the Alpha Channel's box.  This required saving as a copy for some reason so I did.  And whalla it is now working.

Can anyone shed a little light on this for an uninformed person? 

Oh and I also now seem to be printing borderless.  Not really sure what changed but I'll take it.  Until I undo whatever I don't know I did.

So I am trying tp print another large image using QI. File size is less 701.8MB saved as a Windows style TIFF.  The thumbnail comes up but the image is solid white. Any ideas?

Fred I sent you an email.

Thanks

Dave

Ended up finding everything.  All set the same as yours.  I just did a print with QI and the border was nearly 1/4".  Probably still okay for my use but would be nice to get rid of it.  Will keep fiddling with it.  If business stays good I will likely be upgrading to a 44" printer which will render the point moot on any prints under 44" I guess.

Hi Fred,

It has taken some time to re-visit this issue but I am looking into that bottom margin a bit now.  The screen shots on the previous page, how did you get to those.  I know the middle one and did double check that but the one where the margins are defined I cannot find, and also the bottom one.

I did check another page which also talks about margins but I think it is not the one I need.  I also went into Edit-Preferences- and checked that overspray was turned on.

Thanks

So I asked this question in another forum and got a lot of really smart alek questions from pros who seem to think they never took a crappy photo.  I wanted to know how to remove the sky from an image and replace it with a better one.  I posted the image for them to view and instead of getting a technical answer they criticized my work and composition and all that other stuff without any knowledge of what the image was to be used for.  So I will ask it here as folks here are way more friendly.

I am looking to remove washed out or dreary skies from some of the panos that I create. They are to be used for backdrops on model railroads.  I know how to make selections replace a sky in general, I have googled it and watched all sorts of you tube videos on the subject.  However, nothing I have seen explains how one can get all those little sections of sky that peek out from behind tree limbs, gaps between buildings etc.  I have tried using the select color range in CS5 and then held shift while clicking on the various shades of sky.  This works sort of well but when one looks close it doesn't look great.  My customers are detail oriented so it will be looked at closely. Anyone have any ideas?  I work in CS5 but would try another program if there is one that would do this better.

Thanks

Hi Jeff, yeah that's exactly right.  You're right that I can probably get away with less, I guess I just want to have the most detail I can. Kinda figure if I exceed expectations then it beats not meeting them.  I am likely sweating the small stuff.  The forum is pretty good for answers to a lot of my questions.  I am sure I will have more questions in the coming weeks.

thanks for the link, that's a pretty good explanation.

Okay got it printed at 200 ppi and you're right it looks just as good.

I am going to have to look more into that bottom margin.  It is very small so .01" might be what its at for whatever reason.  I will look at it closer tonight.

Thanks for your help I really appreciate the patience.

yeah it must have been.  I have been having issues understanding resolution to be quite honest.  This business has been a real learning experience.  Which is nice but sometimes I am in a bit too deep.

So, the image is at 250 ppi.  At this size it comes out very sharp. Would 200 ppi be better and more manageable or am I on the wrong track?  Is it the number of pixels that makes the difference?

I know I can reduce the pixels in the image which according to photoshop reduces the size ( I also understand the stated photoshop size is kind of meaningless). So is there a certain number of pixels per foot that I should look at? I.E. one foot should be 1200 pixels or whatever it is?

Is there a digital imaging for dumbies?  I feel like I am wandering in the dark sometimes.

yeah that's no problem.  I just did it Fred's way and the border along the bottom is very small.  It would be better if this went away but probably not a deal breaker if it won't.  It does show in the preview though.  I printed a smaller backdrop with this method. 

I tried printing the bigger one I uploaded to Fred but it is now telling me that there is not enough storage capacity for the job.  This confuses me as I have previously printed an image 55 feet long through QI and it worked just fine.  I wonder if my RAM upgrade will help with this? 

i guess that might help.  I have tried the roll paper borderless election in the driver dialog.  I set a paper size of 17" x 218".  And then made the print size the 17" x 216" that I need.

It still shows a small margin along the bottom of the page.  For kicks I also tried Borderless in the Custom Fit dialog box as well as fit to page which still resulted in a border along the bottom.

okay I am using an Epson 4880.  Let me give that a quick try and see what happens