So it appears to me you can't upres in ACR. Am I not seeing something I should be seeing? The workflow options box only has options up to 100%..smaller yes but nothing bigger.

Can you give more details? My workflow options box, under the Size drop down menu, offers seven output sizes: the native size, three smaller, and three larger. It's been the same for every RAW file I've ever processed from at least 5 or 6 different cameras.

Screen capture. My largest size is my native size. All available options are smaller.

Which camera are you using that's 33.2MP native?

You can upres to any size you wish.
The custom crop tool - with inch or pixel size, then ppi (for the inch sizes) in the Workflow options.

Up or down in res - Now whether its Bicubic sharper or smoother, or bilinear. I sure hope its not nearest neighbor.
Kind of wish i knew for sure. Guess it would use the PS standards for up or down.

Leaf A75

Thanks. So we don't know if it's Bicubic sharper or not? Hmm..

CR 5.2 and LR 2.2 use an adaptive bicubic method for image resampling, which takes into account the difference in size between your original (native) image resolution and final (i.e., destination) image resolution, among other things. It is most definitely NOT nearest neighbor, and that is very easy to verify by trying a resample and then doing a comparison with a nearest neighbor resample from PS.

Again, thanks. Why doesn't ACR use a simple percentage box for up or down sizing?

Interesting. I have no idea.

Chan,
You are a fantastic source of information (correct) on ACR.
Thanks for all your posts here. They continue to advance everyone's workflow, and in ways we can fully understand the principles behind this technology.
Now if you get a print dialogue in ACR

There will be additional Camera Raw workflow options available in the future, though we have not settled on the exact interface yet. It is likely we will provide additional (more flexible) ways to specify the desired target image size.

While you're changing ACR, is there any chance that we could have crosshairs in the center of a crop, especially now that the crop is only shown in crop mode, makes centering far easier...

Oh and please pretty please don't make crop work like in LR!

How about also returning to the previous simple selecting of indvidual image/size attributes in ACR? Rather than launching another pop up window, in what is already a pop up window, which if launched from Bridge preview is launched from yet another pop up window. It's like Russian dolls!

Not unless the minimum screen size supported moves beyond 1024x768...there's no real estate...and it'll only get worse, not better in future versions. What might be possible is saved, named presets which could be selected from a main level dropdown...but to access all of the info there's no way to do it without a secondary dlog. Try setting Camera Raw to the minimum size sometimes and see what the engineers have to fight against in UI design...

YES! YES! YES! Named presets for output would be FANTASTIC!!!

I go back and forth between 16 bit ProPhoto RGB and 8-bit sRGB output, to different folders on my desktop, and it drives me INSANE. Something simple like the Lightroom drop down menu, with a list of presets that remembered Color Space, bit depth, size, and destination folder.... Ah, that would make me so so happy.

Who do I have to beg?

Nobody...all you have to do is wait...(that's all you CAN do). Nothing much will change till the next major rev of Camera Raw.

I am of the completely opposite opinion, the crop tool in ACR now seems so primitive and clunky compared to how it works in LR.
I love to have it made the same, even the fact that it automatically places a crop on entire image when tool is selected is a great timesaver.

Good to have a reason for this and with the increased popularity of netbooks, it'll be good to keep it small. We don't always need a big laptop on location.
But why wasn't it placed in a tab like the other controls? There's space for 2.5 more tabs, even at smallest window size possible. That would be more elegant and you could still have the image attributes at bottom, to remind you of what they are, to prevent forgetting when changing.

You prefer a method which is slower, counter intuitive and confusing given that PS works normally?

No I prefer LR's method that is faster and easier, plus it also means I can get horizontals corrected easier [if need be] at same time. It's only 'counter intuitive' as you put it, simply as you are used to the older version. It actually works more like you would do things in real life and may have been the original way of dong things in PS - if the hardware had been up to it when PS was invented. Besides the PS way is not 'normal' if you consider when using a darkroom easel to crop and which predates PS, it works more like LR and the darkroom has been around a little bit longer than PS.
I also found LR's crop a bit odd at first, but the giveaway that it is better is that I now miss it in ACR/PS, despite having used it a lot more. Every time I use the crop tool in ACR, it annoys me it's not like LR as it's slower, clumsier and at times damned fiddly to use.