Welcome to TalkGraphics.com
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 72
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1

    Default

    I was wondering about this topic for many years. I always set my web graphics on 72 dpi. Some time ago there was an extensive article on photo.net proving the dpi feature is literally meaningless. Pages over pages, many photos, documents and screen shots. Don't have the link anymore. But I found this instructive article:
    http://www.photo.net/learn/resize/

    Note that the ppi/dpi-feature can be important for prints.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Out behind the henweigh...
    Posts
    5,115

    Default

    the Bottom Line on this subject guys is...

    For the web... Make your pics as small (file size wise) as you can get them while still looking good. Smaller is faster, thus better.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Sunny Florida
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Thank you for all of your responses! WR1000

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    7

    Default

    I stumbled upon this discussion in a Google search. I'm having the same confusion about this. Here's my situation:

    Though not a graphics professional, I have drawn many comic strips and now want to put them on the web. I drew them in Flash, so they are vector images. I personally have my computer screen resolution set at 800 x 600, but I wonder what MOST people have theirs set at.

    When I export the Flash files as GIFs, I scale them down in the export dialog box to the size (width and height) I want them so that they will take up most of the horizontal area of my screen. But when I scale them down like this, the resolution setting in the dialog box automatically gets lower, and I end up with a GIF at 67 or so dpi. If I try to make the resolution higher, the image gets bigger, and that would make it require scrolling to view on someone's screen, something I don't want.

    I can't seem to set the resolution independently of the image size.

    I am confused by this. I guess I tend to think of resolution the way you think of it when using a scanner, where the size of the image you are scanning and the resolution you scan at are two different things.

    What I am trying to figure out is, is my image displaying at a lower quality because it is 67 dpi? And what can I do to make it sharper? I mean, aren't the pixels smaller at higher resolution, and shouldn't this make an image potentially show more detail?

    Is this just a shortcoming of Flash's export filter, or is this just the way it is with every program?

    Another thing I'm trying to figure out is, if someone has their monitor set at a higher resolution, like 1024 x 768 or whatever, does that mean my image will display on their screen smaller than it displays on an 800 x 600 screen? I want it to display large enough to be easily readable.

    It's damn confusing! What are your thoughts?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Oops. Sorry. My screen resolution is set at 1024 x 768, not 800 x 600. Now that looks fine on my 15" laptop screen. I see that reducing to 800 x 600 does make the comic get bigger and require scrolling. I'm sure hardly anyone surfs at 640 x 480 anymore. Isn't that the resolution that originally gave birth to the idea of 72dpi for the web?

    I would guess that most people must be using at least 1024 by now. Does anyone know for sure?

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Norway & Sweden & USA
    Posts
    1,233

    Default

    "Some time ago there was an extensive article on photo.net proving the dpi feature is literally meaningless."

    It is. Forget DPI. Only pixels matter.
    K
    www.klausnordby.com/xara (big how-to article)
    www.xaraxone.com/FeaturedArt/kn/ (I was the first-ever featured artist in the Xone)
    www.graphics.com (occasional columnist, "The I of The Perceiver")



  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    119

    Default

    My screen res is 1600x1200, so an 800x600 image would appear to be fairly small. Unfortunately no web designer can control the specs of any of their visitors so most will provide for the current 'norm'. I've no idea what that is right now, but the majority of computer packages presently ship with a 17" monitor which, while some owners will still have set to 800x600, anybody with an ounce of computer know-how will have set at 1024x768. It should also be taken into account that not everybody browses the web full screen (I don't, and boy do I hate people who add scripts to their sites that force a full screen browser!) and some will have extra nav bars (Yahoo, Google etc). All of this affects the amount of 'viewing space' any one visitor will have and has to be taken into account when adding images to your site. Whilst a small image viewed on a screen with a high res might not be too appealing, having to scroll to see the entire image because you run a low res isn't particularly fun either.

    Right, on to the DPI. DPI stands for DOTS PER INCH and therefore has no bearing on web based images. It's a measurment used in printing. For example, an 8in by 10in image printed at 300dpi and the same image printed at 72dpi will be the exact same size (8x10), but the later won't be as good quality because there are less dots of ink per inch.

    For the web, the measurment used is PPI (PIXELS PER INCH) and the standard is 72. If you set the PPI too high, the image will take longer to load, as John has already point out. The file size will also be larger, only slightly for a 96 PPI image, but why use up more server space that you need to?

    Admittedly, if you create an image in Xara and change the DPI when exporting the dimentions will change too, but you can work around this by making the image slightly larger to begin with. Personally, I prefer to export the image as is, then use Photoshop to make it the size I want because I have more control. http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/smile.gif
    Saz ~ Naturally Blonde, Naturally Dizzy!

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Thanks. So I guess then it doesn't matter.

    Saz, when you scale down an image in the Flash Export Dialog box, are you essentially doing the same thing as you are when you scale it down in Photoshop or similar program? Aside from the ability to apply image manipulations in Photoshop, is the act of scaling or resizing the same, producing the same quality theoretically, between the two methods?

    I drew my comic strips in Flash twice as big as needed. Would it be better to draw them exactly the size I want them to display, so I don't have to scale them down when I export? Or is there no difference in image quality?

    I think there's no difference but just wanted to get an expert opinion.

    Thanks.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    7

    Default

    By the way, I have noticed a very slight improvement in image quality when using a higher GIF color depth. Even when I have only used 15 or so colors in a comic, lines seem to look smoother at 256 colors than at 16 or 32. But maybe I'm imagining the difference.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    119

    Default

    I've never used Flash, so I wouldn't know what happens when you scale an image with it I'm afraid.

    The reason I use Photoshop is because I can set the ppi and the image dimentions to what I want exactly, where as with Xara, if you change the dpi, the dimentions change and vice versa. I don't know if that's the case with Flash or not. Sorry.
    Saz ~ Naturally Blonde, Naturally Dizzy!

 

 

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •