Resolution tips (Yangge is my test subject for explanation)

[HAMILTOONS]

Hi all. While viewing Yangge's "A Big Man" picture (very nice) it took some time to load. This was due to the picture having a 300 dpi resolution as shown below.



When posting at that resolution it can take a prolonged amount of time to load, especially for dial-up users. What I did was remove the constrain proportions check at the bottom left. I then changed the resolution to 72 dpi and reentered the 500 x 515 pixel size as show below.



I then used the File > Save for Web function with a 42% quality and voila, the same picture, nice clear quality but at a faster load time.



I hope this assists some who aren't aware of this process. It also will help all to enjoy our art more conveniently.

[HellboyOne]

Most everyone has their own method of accomplishing this, thanks for posting yours! One thing though...

Why did you have to turn off constrain proportions? It's an unnecessary step...seems like it just opens up the process to errors.

[ChadTHX1138]

I think this post should be a sticky thread...

also the pictures that are larger than a 21inch monitor, even at a high resolution are getting annoying.

[HellboyOne]

It should be common sense not to post images so huge. It doesn't happen that often. And not everyone has a program to change an image's size and resolution, although this can usually be dealt with within the scanner's software.

A rule of thumb: if you have to scroll to see an entire image, it's too big.

Another one: if you have to wait more than 3 or 4 seconds for an image to load up, it's too big.

[corkbutt]

Why did you have to turn off constrain proportions? It's an unnecessary step...seems like it just opens up the process to errors.

Yeah - unless you're going to manually change the dimensions of the image (and in this instance I can't imagine you'd ever have reason to) the constrain proportions is unneccesary.

Good point though, Hamiltoons.

Photoshop's "Save for Web" feature can be your best friend - use it and you'll always end up with an RGB image that is smaller than if you'd just save directly to JPG or GIF.
There can be some color shift with the Save for Web - but with a little practice I've found you can come very close to your original intent.

? Corbett

[emceeONE]

I post 300dpi jpgs all the time. I've found that dpi on the internet is not at all related to download speed. Actual pixel size is. The bigger the width X height, the longer it takes (because that's obviously related to file size along with quality). Also, try attaching Yannge's original pic to the board and check the difference in speed. It's his server (in China) that is responsible for the download speed.


*at least with my cable modem...I don't know about dial up.


and thanks for reposting the yangge picture...it was taking forever to download.

[corkbutt]

Wow.
Not only is that confusing but it's misleading.

If all monitors display at 72dpi, why would you save an image for the web as anything else? I would recommend NOT getting in the habit of uploading pictures that are 1/4 inch by 1/4 inch at 300dpi in order to get your image to show up properly.

? Corbett

[emceeONE]

true. But I usually work at 300dpi and just shrink that image down to the pixel dimension I want without further thought to dpi. Never really had a problem....unless someone says that my images take forever to download

[corkbutt]

No, no - you're right - it works just the same - it's just not a practical way to describe it in a thread directed toward users unfamiliar with resolution and the web (IMO).

For example (and this is in general, of course - printing specs get much more involved than this):
If you want an image to appear as a 5 inch square on the internet you would save it at 5 inches at 72 dpi.
If you want an image to print as a 5 inch square on a press you would save it at 5 inches at 300dpi.
SIMPLE!

But using your method, if you wanted an image to appear as a 5 inch square on the internet you would save it as a 1.2 inch square at 300dpi.
CONFUSING!

? Corbett

[emceeONE]

Ah! Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up.

It does make for an interesting thought, however: if people are thinking inches for something indoctrinated in pixels...then I think that's why we end up with the scroll causing images

Like, I would never think 5 inch square on a monitor for sharing on the internet. 500 pixel square, yes.

[corkbutt]

Likewise - I've never bragged to anyone that my penis is over 860 pixels long.





Until now.

[drugmassacre]

i muse the same method as Rajesh...I don't really think in terms of numbers, I just shrink it down to where it looks good on my screen. Then I SAVE AS

that way I get my print and my web versions in one scan

[BlueHarp411]

so did yall decide it was the Chinese server causing it to be slow or not? The technical stuff got me confused.

Jill

[corkbutt]

that way I get my print and my web versions in one scan

This doesn't really make sense to me - I don't scan my stuff twice.
In fact, in cases where my artwork is created digitally, a scan doesn't even enter into the equation.
But I don't think anyone wants to listen to me yammer on about my own process. Mine works for me - you guys do whatever works for you. We all get to the same place.

The main thing is realize what your resolution to size ratio is and DON'T post huge images.

[HellboyOne]

Yeah...there's no reason to scan twice, Drugs. Just scan at the bigger size and resize in Photoshop. Scanning twice is...well, just odd.