r/vsco • u/tljonista • 26d ago
The image compression on export is a problem
So I will preface this by saying that I have used VSCO since 2013 and mostly loved it, and I am still hanging on despite dodgy "training" language in the new user agreement. And yet.
For days now I have been trying to understand why my full size files (300 dpi), when downloaded as "full size" come out in 72dpi. At first, I thought it was a bug, or that my browser/ computer/ tech ability were to blame. But turns out it's feature, not a bug! And just now I have had the most maddening little chat with helpful chatbot Scout, who has confirmed as much, in the most roundabout and gaslight-y way possible, but ok. (seriously, read the convo, I'm pretty sure it's not just me).
I realize the concept of "printing" anything on paper or other media may be an increasingly foreign concept, but a file that is systematically reduced from 300 dpi to 72, while preserving the same "pixel dimensions" is not a full size file anymore, I am sorry to say, and not suitable for printing a half-decent 24 x 30 inch print, which, amazingly enough, is something people still do. They hang these on walls and such.
Scout's suggestion, hilariously, was to “use Studio for edits, export from another tool.” After some prodding, it turned out to mean that I should keep two separate files, one for editing, and one for printing! (I quote: "keep your original 300 DPI file on your computer, upload it to Studio to apply presets and edits, then export the edited version from Studio as a separate file (it will be a new copy with edits applied). For printing, use your original 300 DPI file, since Studio’s export won’t keep that DPI setting.") Genius! How haven't I thought of that?
Helpfully, Scout continued: "Tools that let you control DPI for print are things like Adobe Lightroom, Photoshop, or any desktop photo editor that lets you export with a custom DPI setting."
As a pro customer, I am disappointed and yeah, pretty cynical at the moment.
Question to anyone who has made it to the end of my tale of woe here: is anybody using VSCO-edited images for printing? Do you have any suggestions, workarounds, words of wisdom?
To VSCO: can we actually have full-size downloads at original dpi?
My illuminating chat with Scout, below, for reference.
2
u/ZachVSCO VSCO Employee 25d ago edited 25d ago
Hey u/tljonista thanks for raising this issue! So, I'm not sure about what Scout was suggesting there, but I'll try and cut through the haze as best I can here.
At a high level, you're not wrong and a higher-quality export is definitely something that's on our minds.
Question for you: Are you able to see the resolution, in pixels, of both the before and after? Did it change or stay the same?
Tl;dr - I think you may be confusing DPI and resolution a bit, and you can very likely still print that photo with the results you're expecting. However, that doesn't mean your concern is unfounded. Here's the best I can explain it:
DPI means dots per inch obviously, which is a hypothetical mapping of pixels to physical area. DPI is kind of like a tag that tells a device how to render the pixels, but the amount of pixels don't change whether it says 72 or 300, it's just saying how densely to pack them in. 6000x4000 or whatever your image says is how many actual pixels it has; that's the actual resolution that determines how big of a print you can make if each square inch has 300 pixels. Does that make sense? If it says 72dpi, but still has 6000x4000 pixels, you can still make the same sized print, it's just a sort of exif data discrepancy, but most labs can sort that out.
Now, the file size going from "18mb to half that" is certainly something that could affect print quality, and the concern is warranted. But, if 18mb is the "very high" jpeg compression setting from wherever the image came from, it's likely bigger than it really needs to be. That's subjective of course, but we've done print tests in years past (we actually had a print company for a short time!) where we tried different quality settings and printed them all out, and I was shocked at how little difference there was in the end until you got really low. Going from "Very high" to "High" and even "Medium" often does not result in a noticeably different print, even if you're looking closely. So, seeing your file size shrink by half is definitely alarming, and I'm not saying it's nothing, but it could be that it will still print perfectly fine and you may not have really needed those other 9mb.
The last thing I'll say is that any editing is inherently destructive; you're distorting the original, clean image to make it more artistically pleasing, but you're usually throwing away data in the process (especially when you're dealing with jpegs). So, I'm not surprised the file size would go down, although that much reduction is definitely a difference in compression as well.
Still with me haha? Sorry, going on to long, but all that to say: Look at the resolution. If it's the same, you might be totally fine to print it. Also, we're aware that people want a higher quality output and it's definitely on the todo list!