General Category > Anim8or v0.98 Discussion Forum
v0.97 Preview Ready (With ART Ray Tracer!)
onespirit5777:
I would like to be able to render 8000x8000 or larger with a minimum of 150dpi because I print my work on canvas. I know it would take a long long time to render something this large but it wouldn't be the first time. The fractal program I use lets me go as much as 10,000x10,000 if the calculations are not to advanced. It will glitch sometimes and render twice that but with no AA and I don't have a program I can load a file that large and perform a AA to it to make it smooth. I have the source code for the program but I don't know C+ otherwise I could fix the problem.
The largest file I have is about 960mb and its a bmp file so time to render isn't something I'm worried about.
headwax:
There was a program around that let you render your still in quarters. Have a search for it.
floyd86:
--- Quote from: headwax on September 16, 2008, 09:04:52 pm ---There was a program around that let you render your still in quarters. Have a search for it.
--- End quote ---
I searched for that program a while ago, but the site seems to be removed by the maker (mongoose?). So if anyone has a copy, please post it.
VBSmiles:
--- Quote from: onespirit5777 on September 16, 2008, 08:15:43 pm ---I would like to be able to render 8000x8000 or larger with a minimum of 150dpi because I print my work on canvas. I know it would take a long long time to render something this large but it wouldn't be the first time. The fractal program I use lets me go as much as 10,000x10,000 if the calculations are not to advanced. It will glitch sometimes and render twice that but with no AA and I don't have a program I can load a file that large and perform a AA to it to make it smooth. I have the source code for the program but I don't know C+ otherwise I could fix the problem.
The largest file I have is about 960mb and its a bmp file so time to render isn't something I'm worried about.
--- End quote ---
sorry bub. dpi (dots per inch ) isn't a determining factor, ppi (pixel per inch) is. 150 ppi isn't very high quality ( in terms of photography anyway . 300 ppi is a better choice. )
why would you want a 53" x 53" photo anyway? Even at 300 ppi you are talking about a 26" x 26" photo. ( 2 1/2' x 2 1/2') My semi professional camera at full resolution is only 3504 X 2336 ( magazine quality @ 300 ppi)
Note that ppi AND dpi are related to some degree, but somewhat independent from actual photo size in terms of resolution. A 300 X 300 will look great at 300 ppi, but it would be a pretty small photograph ( 1 inch x 1 inch ) If however you print this ppi on 150 dpi, you are doubling your size to 2 inches ( still small :) with less quality)
HOpe this helps. I'll get more info for you if needed.
onespirit5777:
Yes ppi not dpi - That is what I do when trying to get a bigger print. 150ppi is not the preferred for a good print but at least it is something to work with.
300ppi is really the min for a good print.
My bad on the dpi - I do know better
Thanks for the reminder.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version