I'm stumped! Image import scaling issue.

[gwpriester]

While we are on this topic

I would really like to see the ability to change the resolution of a bitmap. If you have a bitmap fill or a fractal fill, you can right click on the fill and the resolution appears on the Infobar.

If you would right click on a photo that was one resolution and then change the resolution in the same way on the Infobar it would save the work around which is resizing the image on the screen until the resolution is what you want.

Any feelings one way or the other?

Gary

[ED]

Originally posted by gwpriester:
While we are on this topic

I would really like to see the ability to change the resolution of a bitmap. If you have a bitmap fill or a fractal fill, you can right click on the fill and the resolution appears on the Infobar.

If you would right click on a photo that was one resolution and then change the resolution in the same way on the Infobar it would save the work around which is resizing the image on the screen until the resolution is what you want.

Any feelings one way or the other?

Gary

If I look at the resolution in dpi of the image I import it is 72. The difference between 72 and 96 is exactly the same difference I'm getting with importing images.

So as previously stated the image size Xara resizes the imported image to (larger or smaller) is relative to the original dpi of the image being imported.

Here is the key question then...

Is this the way Xara wants/intended this to work? Is this a bug?

[ED]

Gary, to answer your question... I would like to see Xara leave the scale of the image alone when importing, just like it does when exporting, however I'd like to be able to right click on any image and change it's resolution in dpi.

[Egg Bramhill]

Ed
On my apple image above, if you save it to hard drive and then import it to Xara, what size does it import as?
Can you also post one of the images your having trouble with? What format are they?
Egg

[Egg Bramhill]

Here is the key question then...

Is this the way Xara wants/intended this to work? Is this a bug?

I would say that this is the way it was meant to work. I agree with Judi.

Consider that your creating a flyer. You want to include an image at 600 ppi for printing quality purposes. Do you want to display on screen at 600 ppi on your A5 size flyer, or at it's more realistic 96 ppi so you know how it will look on the page?

Xara seems to handle imported rasters in the following way:
Xara screen display width = 96 / production ppi * production width
Xara screen display height = 96 / production ppi * production height

Egg

[PhilM]

When importing bitmaps Xara X honours whatever size the bitmap says it is.

Many bitmap formats (JPG, PNG, BMP, etc.) contain enough information to give them a "real-world" size. E.g. a bitmap that is 216 pixels square and whose resolution is given as 72dpi therefore has the real-world size of 3 inches square. (216/72=3)

This is useful when the image really does have a real-world size, e.g. when you've just scanned something at 300dpi, you really want it to appear on the Xara page at the exact size it was when you scanned it. (If your page units are set to inches or millimeters the reported size of the bitmap will then make perfect sense.)

But it's not so useful when your page units are pixels because, unless the bitmap is 96dpi (the same as Xara X's definition of a pixel), its reported pixel size will not be the same as the actual pixel size of the image.

E.g. the example 3 inch wide bitmap above will be reported as 3*96=288 pixels. (Note that 288/216 = 1.33...)

So you see, you will find the current behaviour correct if you think a Xara X document is mainly about paper and incorrect if you think its about pixels...

Phil

[Egg Bramhill]

Thanks for clearing that up Phil.
Egg

[ED]

PhilM... I appreciate you coming in to explain this. I understand but at the same time I'm disappointed.

The Xara site indicates that Xara X is a great program for web design. Here is a quote from the site...

"It's great for web graphics (all of xara.com has been designed using Xara X) as well as incredibly detailed illustrations"

Well it's not giving a web designer what he needs when importing graphics or photos. When I import an image I don't what to have to "adjust" it's scale or apply a "workaround" to fix an unexpected scaling of the original either larger or smaller, depending.

What I'm reading here is that XaraX is focusing on doing things right for the world on inches and paper. This is not the world the web designer lives in.

I don't want to be held hostage by the paper world and be forced to do extra work with almost every image import as it now works.

Can't we have a setting in the options as to how the user would prefer to import graphics?

I'd rather change *one* global setting (or toggle) to keep the size in pixels the same for all imports than to have to change each and every image I import that is not already 96dpi. The vast majority of images I import are NOT 96dpi so basically I'm "forced" to change the scale of every imported image/graphic.

THIS IS NOT HELPING ME AND CAUSES A LOT OF UNNECESSARY AND NEEDLESS EXTRA WORK. http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/mad.gif To me, IMHO, it is unacceptable to "force" all users to adjust the size of most every image imported into XaraX!

We need to keep *both* the paper/illustrator happy as well as the web designer.

To me, when I have my web designer hat on, this is an importing bug.

I know others have already indicated that they too have to "workaround" this shortcoming and/or default behavior.

Also, when did this change in behavior come into effect? I know that this has not always been the way importing images worked.

[Charles Moir]

Phil is right. We do look at the resolution of the JPEG and scale it according to that resolution of the bitmap in the file. The Windows screen resolution is 96dpi (or should be - Adobe Windows products get this wrong - and this is the cause of most of these problems).

But you're right also Ed, that this is not always useful, and most software now ignores the specified resolution and just shows it 1:1 at 100%. Also it's evident that many digital cameras have completely random resolution values stored in the JPEG file and so that's all the more reason for us to re-examine this.

So we are planning on changing this behaviour for X2 release to import all bitmaps at 96dpi, so they'll be shown 1:1 at 100%. And although technically this is the wrong thing to do, it's likely to be more useful, especially in the world that has lots of mixed 72dpi (Mac) images and for those from digital cameras.

Not a very satisfactory situation when we have to make changes that we know are technically wrong, just in order to overcome problems caused by other software and products that get it wrong. But it will solve the issue described here.

[ED]

Now I know why I buy just about every Xara product that comes out and also purchase each upgrade when available for all those products.

It's because of you Charles and the willingness of Xara to listen to user/customer needs.

Please keep the toggle option in mind since a global setting with the ability to turn on and off this functionality would satisfy the most situations that could ever come along.

Thanks Charles and Thanks Xara for a wonderful product.

Thanks also for taking the user community ideas seriously. There is a wonderful diverse group of XaraX users here and they all have a lot of great ideas and suggestions. I'm proud to be able to type with these guys and gals once in a while. http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

I know it must be tuff to decide what goes in the next release and what must wait or be discarded. I don't envy this task or those involved in these critical decisions.

Keep up the good work! http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/smile.gif