Jump to content
Michail

Image is placed with wrong resolution

Recommended Posts

If I place an image with one click, this image should appear in the original resolution of the image, and thus in the planned size. Is this assumption correct?

I place an image (Pixabay - see attached file) that has a resolution of 169 ppi. In APub it is placed with 72 ppi, much larger than planned. In the "Resource Manager" there are even two different resolutions (71 and 72)! I think that's a mistake.

Training 1.jpg

Resource Manager.PNG


My Specs:
- Processor: AMD Phenom™ II X4 955 Processor 3.20 GHz- RAM: 8 GB
- Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- Monitor: SyncMaster F2380 (resolution 1920x1080)
- Operating system: Windows 10 Pro (1803) / 64 bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Michail said:

If I place an image with one click, this image should appear in the original resolution of the image, and thus in the planned size. Is this assumption correct?

I place an image (see attached file) that has a resolution of 169 ppi. In APub it is placed with 72 ppi, much larger than planned. In the "Resource Manager" there are even two different resolutions (71 and 72)! I think that's a mistake.

The scenario you describe typically means the file actually has nothing written into the DPI fields inside the image and/or are not written into the proper fields and so APub (everything, really) is going to use the default resolution to initially size the image.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MikeW said:

The scenario you describe typically means the file actually has nothing written into the DPI fields inside the image and/or are not written into the proper fields and so APub (everything, really) is going to use the default resolution to initially size the image.

When you open the image in an image editing program, you will see a resolution of 169 ppi! In InDesign, it is placed at exactly that resolution.


My Specs:
- Processor: AMD Phenom™ II X4 955 Processor 3.20 GHz- RAM: 8 GB
- Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- Monitor: SyncMaster F2380 (resolution 1920x1080)
- Operating system: Windows 10 Pro (1803) / 64 bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Michail said:

When you open the image in an image editing program, you will see a resolution of 169 ppi. In InDesign, it is placed at exactly that resolution.

Can you link to the actual pixabay image?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MikeW said:

Can you link to the actual pixabay image?

I don't know why, but here's the link:

https://pixabay.com/de/übung-gewicht-frau-sport-mädchen-841167/


My Specs:
- Processor: AMD Phenom™ II X4 955 Processor 3.20 GHz- RAM: 8 GB
- Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- Monitor: SyncMaster F2380 (resolution 1920x1080)
- Operating system: Windows 10 Pro (1803) / 64 bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Michail said:

I don't know why, but here's the link:

For this reason...

capture-002300.png.cad57720ad8151f130f432f3286e50a9.png

The image, for all purposes, has no resolution. So whatever photo application, layout application, etc., is going to use the OS native resolution or the application's default resolution.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Michail said:

I place an image (Pixabay - see attached file) that has a resolution of 169 ppi.

Where does that (literally!) odd number come from??


Alfred online2long.gif
Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 1.7.3.481 • Windows 10 Home (4th gen Core i3 CPU)
Affinity Photo for iPad 1.7.3.155 • Designer for iPad 1.7.3.1 • iOS 12.4.1 (iPad Air 2)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MikeW said:

The image, for all purposes, has no resolution. So whatever photo application, layout application, etc., is going to use the OS native resolution or the application's default resolution. 

Why does InDesign do it right?
APh also displays the changed resolution correctly. Is it possible that APub gets the resolution from the wrong corner?

image.png.4a2cf9ecb28572c9fcad6654191e8e5b.png


My Specs:
- Processor: AMD Phenom™ II X4 955 Processor 3.20 GHz- RAM: 8 GB
- Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- Monitor: SyncMaster F2380 (resolution 1920x1080)
- Operating system: Windows 10 Pro (1803) / 64 bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, αℓƒяє∂ said:

Where does that (literally!) odd number come from??

With this resolution, the image has exactly the dimensions with which the image is to be placed in flyers.


My Specs:
- Processor: AMD Phenom™ II X4 955 Processor 3.20 GHz- RAM: 8 GB
- Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- Monitor: SyncMaster F2380 (resolution 1920x1080)
- Operating system: Windows 10 Pro (1803) / 64 bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MikeW said:

Here...place this version.

exercise-841167.zip

Thanks for the effort! It's not about the one picture, it's about the general problem. It can't be that APub ignores the set resolution.


My Specs:
- Processor: AMD Phenom™ II X4 955 Processor 3.20 GHz- RAM: 8 GB
- Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- Monitor: SyncMaster F2380 (resolution 1920x1080)
- Operating system: Windows 10 Pro (1803) / 64 bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No effort at all.

But ID doesn't "place it right" here. Not if sized according to the non-existent dpi. If I merely click on the page when placing the 1280 x 1920 px version of that downloaded file, it is way larger. In the screen shot below, I also changed a copy to have 300 dpi in the XY dimension fields and also merely click to place.

The page size is 8.5" x 11"

capture-002301.png.0ed3d789cbf008c3b8ab983033df1c9d.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Michail said:

Why does InDesign do it right?
APh also displays the changed resolution correctly. Is it possible that APub gets the resolution from the wrong corner?

Again, there is no dpi in that file. The application and/or OS is basically lying to you by using a default DPI. But it (the DPI) is non-existent in the file as downloaded.

And to be more specific, DPI is informational only. DPI absolutely has no bearing on the resolution. DPI is merely informational and is used by most applications as an aid to initial sizing. But that is it. All that matters is effective PPI and that is determined by an image's placed size.

Affinity applications, APub in this discussion, is treating that image properly. So instead of merely clicking on the page, click as drag out the size with such images and note the effective resolution. Alternatively, set the DPI as needed using an image editor without resampling and all it will change are those two information fields and then place it in APub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A solution would be to APub to place/drop images at the resolution of the document, this way we wouldn't have to reduce the size of those image, or to change PPI in those files. Or we should always place images  with the Place tool to avoid this, creating frame not bigger than needed*.

The fastest way is to drop images, but having them at 1×1 or 72×72 pixels in the document is a pain since we need to resize them each time. Using the place tool is better, but we spend time browsing folders to get the pictures if they're in different places.

Another solution is to use the picture frame tool, and drop the picture inside.

But the picture frame tool lack the PPI information: we need to select the image to check it. the last modifications of this tool made it more usable: it seems if done with resizing the frame using a property (scale to max/min, stretch), when you click on the image, the property is set to "none", and you can select again the picture frame, and resize or adjust it, the image stay locked.

The picture frame tool's got a strange behaviour: when double clicking on a middle handle, instead of fitting the frame to the picture, it becomes a square!

 

A button to reset width and height to original proportions can be handy too.

* By this I mean it shouldn't use the PPI info in the images, but the number of pixels and the resolution of the document. If I drop a 600×600 pixels logo in my document at 300 PPI, it'll be at its max size of 2×2 inches => I can reduce it without losing quality, or enlarge it with loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Wosven said:

A solution would be to APub to place/drop images at the resolution of the document...

Sorry. I don't want any application to make such decisions for me.

And I believe that this as an option would leave many people confused as it might help. I have been given images that have had 2400 dpi in those fields and just clicking to paste left a postage stamp size field in my layout application. The net result was I needed to size it up quite a bit. But if I didn't understand how it all works, I would have jumped on some forum and asked why this happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what happens now is people placing images at 72ppi in document at 300, resulting in images used as background for pages when they can't, since there's not enough pixels, I don't think that helps them more. At least, if the images were placed at the same resolution that the document, it would be simpler.

People usually have a hard time undestanding resolution, and the simplest way for them is to modify the image to a resolution of 300PPI.
For those who don't know how to do this or who use AP (for now, it can't modify resolution without loss of metadata, where you've got credits, copyright and legend when working with professionnal images), it would be better.

And for those, like me, that don't modify PPI, but need to reduce the dropped image's size when it's displayed at 72ppi in a doc at 300ppi, it would be faster than resizing to hage the effective PPI at at least 300.

It's not logical to have images displayed at a different resolution that the document's one, even when they all do it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is that you are mixing resolution up with an image's dpi metadata. Dpi is not resolution. 

I understand what you are writing about. But I am uncertain whether having a nanny make decisions solves the issue.

These same people who want to have a given image the size of a full background are just as likely to stretch it to fit if they are not understanding the what and why of the result of their actions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But ID or APub display those images depending of the DPI metadata.
I know I need at least 118 pixels/cm when using a picture, but 118 isn't the easiest multiplication table to learn, to check if an image is large enough for a frame in a page  :)
People use Photoshop only to check this after modifying to 300PPI!

They don't always want to use those images as background, but when they import images, they don't check effective PPI, and if the image is big enough on the screen, they think it's a big image they can use at a large size.

Over the year, I think it's the more difficult point people have to understand. 90% of Pitstop's errors when creating PDF.

Having picture show at the right PPI (the same as the document) from the start would be better. It's not about having a nanny, since we'll resize it to be at least 300PPI, it's to be effective.
And for some workkflow, using the same images for different uses, they ask to keep images at 72PPI and RVB.

 

I used QXP when effective PPI wasn't displayed, and we managed without Pitstop, and if we failed the printers told us so. But I see no reason for this behavior when working for print (and I'm not sure I can find some for other works, but I didn't thought about it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Wosven said:

I know I need at least 118 pixels/cm when using a picture, but 118 isn't the easiest multiplication table to learn

Since you only need “at least” 118 px/cm (equivalent to 300 px/in) you can work with a value of 120 px/cm, making the calculation very much easier. :)


Alfred online2long.gif
Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 1.7.3.481 • Windows 10 Home (4th gen Core i3 CPU)
Affinity Photo for iPad 1.7.3.155 • Designer for iPad 1.7.3.1 • iOS 12.4.1 (iPad Air 2)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, αℓƒяє∂ said:

you can work with a value of 120 px/cm

Yes, I usually do a rough approximation, it's easier :) (and we usually put the image at its small print size in the full yellow frame as warning for clients, that's the most effective way to show them the problem).

But some of them watch too much TV and don't understand we can't enlarge them and get back details as in serails :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. I I learned in this thread that it is wrong for InDesign to behave exactly as I expect it to. There doesn't seem to be a consensus about dpi and ppi either.
One thing is certain: In APub I can't place an image in the prepared size and resolution with one click. Instead many single steps are necessary to reach this goal.


My Specs:
- Processor: AMD Phenom™ II X4 955 Processor 3.20 GHz- RAM: 8 GB
- Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- Monitor: SyncMaster F2380 (resolution 1920x1080)
- Operating system: Windows 10 Pro (1803) / 64 bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michail said:

One thing is certain: In APub I can't place an image in the prepared size and resolution with one click. Instead many single steps are necessary to reach this goal.

Sure you can. You did it with the image version I uploaded. It only takes the dpi values being actually in the file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, it is not about this one picture. That was just an example. It looks like another software is needed to change the original EXIF data.
I don't know what software you used to change the native resolution.

Update:
I see: ExifTool


My Specs:
- Processor: AMD Phenom™ II X4 955 Processor 3.20 GHz- RAM: 8 GB
- Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
- Monitor: SyncMaster F2380 (resolution 1920x1080)
- Operating system: Windows 10 Pro (1803) / 64 bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Michail said:

As I said, it is not about this one picture. That was just an example. It looks like another software is needed to change the original EXIF data.
I don't know what software you used to change the native resolution.

Then the other images that exhibit this also don't have that information or is improperly written into those two informational fields.

Any image editor should be able to set the DPI to whatever you want it to be. Here's the window in APhoto. Note the unchecked Resample box.

capture-002302.png.ca0d033f71f49e41f0f4cb670ea887e3.png

In the above case, you will also need to Export the changed file as APhoto by default wants to save an APhoto version which nothing outside of Affinity applications can use.

Also, remember that these DPI fields are literally just information. It has no bearing on the quality or resolution of the image. So in the above example, no pixels were altered, there are the same number of pixels as what I started with. Importantly, that image will place by a single click sized properly.

fwiw, I use a different image editor despite having APhoto. I've used it for a long, long time and prefer it. But they work pretty identically in this regard.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To add info...the orginal image I just used also didn't have valid DPI info either and, in Windows not using a hi DPI monitor, APhoto assumed 96 DPI. But the DPI fields are/were really blank...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.