How to get Publisher to print maps at original size, 100%

[Chris Gill]

Hi

I'm building a book in Publisher with a lot of OS map extracts, which need to be reproduced at the original scale of 1:25k. I am starting to place the downloaded image files. I don't have precise control over the scale of the initial download, but I scaled the first one so that it's specified physical size is right - it covers an area 10km wide, and the image width is 40cm.

When I place this in an image frame with the scale set in the picture frame thingy at top left of the Publisher window at 100%, on the printout of my page the 1km squares on the map are printing at about 94% of the original size. I notice that the Publisher picture frame setting says "299dpi (100%)", whereas the actual image is 283ppi. So it seems Publisher  is scaling the image down in size to get 300 (or 299) ppi (which it wrongly calls dpi), and saying that is 100%.

This makes no sense to me. Is there another setting somewhere where I can instruct Publisher to reproduce an image at 100% of its specified physical size? Obviously, I can faff about with each map to compensate for the precise scale of the initial download, but I really just want to set the image width to match the width on the ground (divided by 25k) and stick it on a page at 100%.

I hope someone can shed light!

cheers

 

[David in Яuislip]

This is how V1 works
Placing an image into Publisher, the image will be physically sized (mm or in) based on the document dpi and image pixel dimensions not on any dpi metadata in the file
So if you have images at 283dpi to import, set the document dpi value to 283, import then set back to 300 or whatever. The physical size will be retained
This is based on image layers, if they're rasterised to pixels I don't know. I've attached the pub file in case it helps

Anyway, this is my thousandth post, I hope it's useful, I am off to have my dinner

DPIandPlacing.afpub

[thomaso]

3 hours ago, Chris Gill said:

Publisher  is scaling the image down in size to get 300 (or 299) ppi (which it wrongly calls dpi), and saying that is 100%.

This makes no sense to me.

The sense is to (automatically, by default) ensure that images have the document resolution. This helps to detect insufficient image size during the layout creation for a certain output resolution. Yes, this feature can be annoying, e.g. if you create an application manual for print in 300 dpi but with interface screenshots where you do not expect or need 300 dpi but rather prefer a larger layout size at their original screen resolution. For those situations an option may useful which allows to choose either document or resource resolution for image placements.

Note, container file formats (e.g. affinity, pdf, eps) get placed with their absolute dimensions respectively their own/saved resolution, regardless of the layout document resolution. Whereas the AD/APh feature "Create New File from Clipboard" creates documents with 96 dpi, regardless of the resolution of the item copied to the clipboard.

[Chris Gill]

Thanks both. Input much appreciated. Congrats on the 1k posts David, even if you are overshadowed by thomaso.

I now understand what is going on, but don't understand why a layout program would be designed to alter the physical size of an image to match a document ppi setting. Especially when 300ppi is way more than press printing actually requires.

I understand the idea of setting my document to 283 ppi, but the images I am placing are likely to have slightly varying resolution, so in practice it won't give exactly consistent results. I'll look at whether I can have no document setting. Or maybe a document setting of 200 - surely Publisher wouldn't blow up my images to bring them down to 200ppi?

I may try the pdf route that thomaso has pointed to.

 

 

[David in Яuislip]

2 hours ago, Chris Gill said:

Congrats on the 1k posts David, even if you are overshadowed by thomaso.

Haha, thanks...thomaso is in a different league from me

[thomaso]

6 hours ago, Chris Gill said:

don't understand why a layout program would be designed to alter the physical size of an image to match a document ppi setting.

To me this appears as an unavoidable consequence of two resolutions meeting each other: The layout document + the placed resource. The alternative to place an image in its saved resolution (e.g. 72 dpi) would not solve the problem of two conflicting resolutions because one must rule over the other. Since resolution and dimensions are related properties they also influence & modify each other "by nature".

I understand it feels odd because other layout apps don't use resolution for their layout document but for placed resources only. I guess for Affinity was the decision different to achieve more flexibility with different resource file types (pixel | vector + container + native affinity). And, no, we can not create an Affinity layout document without choosing a certain resolution.

7 hours ago, Chris Gill said:

Especially when 300ppi is way more than press printing actually requires.

That is fully up to you. Of cause you can choose any document resolution and don't need to use one higher than the desired output resolution. As @David in Яuislip mentioned, you even may switch the resolution during the layout. You "just" should care for possibly rasterized layers which may get unintentionally affected by a resolution change, without getting visible on screen directly.

Note, it can make sense (can even be required) to create a layout in far more than 300 dpi. For instance 2000 dpi if a layout gets created in scale 1:10 like an exhibition / fair wall for a print at 1000 % (> 200 dpi) of various metres size (while the PDF file format was or still is limited to a max. dimension of 5 metres, regardless of its resolution). Or e.g. 400 – 600 dpi for the creation of b&w 1-bit images (though 1-bit is not supported yet by Affinity).