PDA

View Full Version : Resolution ?



Lew2re
07-24-2007, 02:00 PM
Is there a way to get the resolution past 72? I use Screamer Net 2 and in Photo Shop. When I have checked the image it was 72. Iíve looked through LightWave found nothing.

Iíd like the get the resolution up a bit.

art
07-24-2007, 02:24 PM
You can change the resolution to anything you want directly in photoshop. Use resize image with the resample image option switched off. If you need a bigger image in terms of size, increase the camera resolution in LW.

JeffrySG
07-24-2007, 02:35 PM
^correct...

Lew2re, you just need to figure out what your total PIXEL size should be, the resolution is not relevant when rendering...

ie: 8.5x11 @ 300ppi is the same as 35.4 x 45.8 @ 72ppi because they are both 2550 x 3300 pixels in dimension...

Captain Obvious
07-24-2007, 02:36 PM
A pixel is a pixel is a pixel. The DPI / PPI values are just metadata about how to print the image.

Surrealist.
07-24-2007, 06:06 PM
Correct. The 72 is actually a default of PS because that is for monitor display. I think most are 72 though I think newer ones are 96 - mine is.

Anyway that is so an inch is an inch on your screen at 72. Since printing is usually at 300, you simply render enough pixels (ppi) for the intended print size at 300 dpi. Then in photo shop change the res to 300 with resample off and you'll have your print size in inches.

Lew2re
07-25-2007, 11:23 AM
Original message


Is there a way to get the resolution past 72? I use Screamer Net 2 and in Photo Shop. When I have checked the image it was 72. Iíve looked through LightWave found nothing.

Iíd like the get the resolution up a bit.

New

My understanding is the higher the res the better quality of the picture. For instance my camera shoots at 180 res. I learn as I go, I can be wrong about all of this.

If I generate 700 pictures with the res of 72 then import into Premiere Pro to make the animation wouldnít it be a better quality if the res was 180?

Again Iím just trying to figure this out.


My monitor is 96

robewil
07-25-2007, 11:40 AM
My understanding is the higher the res the better quality of the picture. For instance my camera shoots at 180 res. I learn as I go, I can be wrong about all of this.
The problem with your thinking is that you are equating dpi (or ppi) with resolution. As others have tried to explain, dpi/ppi is just telling an output device how many pixels to cram inside a given space (an square inch in this case).

The resolution on a picture is really determined by the number of total pixels. For example, an image at 1280X1024 has more resolution than an image or 1024X768, no matter what the dpi/ppi setting is.

Basically, if you want more resolution, render with more pixels. If you want 8"X10" at 300 dpi/ppi, then that's (8X300) by (10X300) or 2400X3000. At 72 dpi/ppi, that would be huge but if you set the dpi/ppi to 300, it will come out to 8" X 10".

Surrealist.
07-25-2007, 11:45 AM
EDIT: robewil and I posted at the same time. :)

You just have to separate the concept of resolution - which applies to monitor display and printing from pixel count - which applies to video and animation frames. Lightwave renders in pixels and those are then interpreted as pixels per inch in PS and thus for printing.

A 1200 x 1200 pixel image opened into photoshop set to a resolution of 300 (with resample turned off) is a 4 by 4 inch file for printing. A much larger image at a resolution of 96 or 72 etc. The usual standard for printers is 300 dpi.

For animation, your target pixel count should be the standard video format that you are going to be using and outputting from. There are presets for this in the Camera properties panel. Example: NTSC DV 720x480. NTEC HD 1920x1080 or 1280x720.

For video and animation work the PS resolution is completely meaningless because NLE programs always read the raw pixel data to determine screen size.

Andyjaggy
07-25-2007, 02:42 PM
Also remember that the fields in LW can do math so if you want something that is ultimately going to be printed at 300dpi just put in your inches and then times by 300 in the field and it will figure out how many pixels you need.

07-26-2007, 06:55 AM
In our wonderfull high-tech world almost everything that we use to display an image re-sizes it by some form of interpolation, harping on about dpi is usually part of the way a Printer (person not machine) tries to A) avoid coming to terms with modern technology and B) avoid taking responsibility for the quality of his/her output (goes along with demanding CYMK without telling you his/her ink profile).
Image resolution "quality" is how many pixels. full stop.
the rest is just manipulation.
Unless we're talking video resolutions - in which case stick to the numbers for PAL, NTSC, 720p or whatever - if someone asks you for an image of a certain dimension (be it in inches or cm), just render it to that proportion with as many pixels as you have time for !

Maxx
07-26-2007, 09:59 PM
harping on about dpi is usually part of the way a Printer (person not machine) tries to A) avoid coming to terms with modern technology and B) avoid taking responsibility for the quality of his/her output.
Image resolution "quality" is how many pixels. full stop.
I have to disagree to an extent with that statement. As someone who's done print-res renders and book layouts (including advertisements), it's not just the printer. Yes, they're trying to cover their own asses, but hey - so am I. I'm a freelancer. But the amount of ads I've seen come across my desk at 1" by 2" at 72 dpi for print layout at 4" by 8" is amazing. Printing presses run on a set resolution - approx. 300 dpi. So if I resample the given image to the proper size for presses, it looks like crap.

Basically, realize that resolution adjustment will happen in PhotoShop. LW will always render at 72 dpi. So multiply. If I've got to render a quarter page ad (in this hypothetical case 4.25" by 5.5"), the resolution out of lightwave needs to be 1275x1650 (or, basically, 4.25*300 x 5.5*300).

As for not specifying what actual ink profile the printers are using, sure. Would be nice to know, but don't be holding your breath for it. After all, they are trying to make sure that you can't return the entire run and make them run it over again... :D

*edit* - Although yes, it boils down to image resolution quality equaling pixel dimensions. (forgot to add that the first time I typed...)