General Category > General Anim8or Forum

render resolution question

<< < (4/7) > >>

cooldude234:

--- Quote from: ENSONIQ5 on July 29, 2016, 10:12:44 pm ---To my way of thinking (with minimal print experience) there's two ways to define the resolution of an image:

1) Specifying the size of the image (in mm or inches) and specifying a DPI resolution; or
2) Specifying the number of pixels in the X and Y dimensions.

The DPI figure is of no value if referring to the image by it's X/Y pixels, it will be determined by the printed/displayed size of the image (ie. DPI = X/W where X is the width of the image in pixels and W is the width in inches).  Conversely, a printer requesting a certain DPI makes sense only if the printed size of the image is known, so if you need a 5 X 8 printed image and the printer needs 300DPI you'd need to render an image 1500 x 2400px.  Or am I missing something?

--- End quote ---

DPI and resolution are two separate things all together. You can have any resolution and any DPI to get the actual width and height of the final image, or you can have any resolution and any size (eg 11 x 8.5 inch) to get the dpi.
I'm pretty sure what the op's concern is the encoded number (the meta data) within the image file its self. Which as I know not every printer uses meta data (they ask you when making a print request to state the dpi).
I may be wrong but I feel like the concern is more of an inconvenience rather than a problem (since you can easily edit meta data with many different types of software).

Alpha2:
Yeah, it's mostly just an inconvenience, not specifically a bug or anything just something causing more confusing than I'd like. As I said most of the art programs I use give you control over the size and resolution at the very start, eg. Need an image to be exactly 3000 pixels wide or even a 7x10 image at 600dpi? You get it before a single pixel is drawn. Here it's a matter of figuring out how many pixels you need the finished art to be based on the pixels per inch of the file type of the finished render and hoping that was composed so that it provides enough to achieve the dimensions you need if you reduce the size of the image to fit and placed into an existing page layout is exact. It can get to be a bit time consuming so I was looking for a workaround to speed things up.

In printing (at least on paper), I'm guessing people have just merged DPI and PPI for the sake of simplicity when dealing with more widely available Print on Demand services. it's been Hammered into me from the beginning that 300 ppi results in an image that doesn't show jaggies or stair stepping on rounded or diagonal lines when going from a digital medium to a printed one where I'd assume DPI originated, so rather than wade into the details with laymen they just seem to use the different terms to mean the same thing. After a while they just became interchangeable except for people who are much more technically versed in screen resolutions.

slex:
It would be great if Animator saves images in 300ppi by default, that way the quality of rendered pictures be perfect.

Youtube seems to be making some readjustments after I upload video rendered within Anim8or which looks crystal clear on computer, but it always lose a lot of quality in YT. That never happens when I render animation in png pictures and connect those pictures into video with some other program. Maybe that's also related to unusual ppi values. 

cooldude234:

--- Quote from: slex on July 30, 2016, 09:52:55 pm ---It would be great if Animator saves images in 300ppi by default, that way the quality of rendered pictures be perfect.

Youtube seems to be making some readjustments after I upload video rendered within Anim8or which looks crystal clear on computer, but it always lose a lot of quality in YT. That never happens when I render animation in png pictures and connect those pictures into video with some other program. Maybe that's also related to unusual ppi values. 


--- End quote ---

Nah that would probably be something entirely different. The problem you are probably encountering has to do with codecs. That and you-tube compresses everything down to crap.
It took me a while to get you-tube to accept my 4k 60fps recordings and even then it still looks like garbage compared to the lossless original (but mind you the original did take 10 gigs just for a minute of video :P)
Shameless plug here
[/youtube]

slex:
10 gigs for a minute  :o, were you been using fraps? I'm sure it records uncompressed videos- not sure what codec it uses. youtube uses MP4-H264-AAC codec (that's why we can watch every new uploads on all devices), and I guess it 'killed' the quality during conversion, that happened also to my animations while I've been recording them into AVI format within Anim8or. I've been installing k-lite codec pack and tried to render videos in many codecs but that didn't help much- video's quality were always degraded on YT.
 Finally, after experimenting with a lot of software I've started rendering in PNG pictures and connect them into video with Blender. That way I do slow renders of scenes with Anim8or only once, and can experiment with video editing with Blender (I find Blender very complicated and slow for simple 3D animation and I don't use it for that- it gave me a lot of headache).

 I've noticed something interesting with Blender- it also saves images at 72ppi by default and that value can't be changed, it has that same value within various picture formats. Having 254ppi in BMP format Anim8or is superior when you render BMP image but I guess the difference should be only visible on printers and ultra HD monitors.
72ppi is the optimal value which works great for pixel density of average computer monitors. I don't have ultra HD monitor so can't tell the difference, but if someone does I'd like to hear that, just render some image in 4K resolution with anti anti-aliasing and save them in BMP and PNG format for comparison.
 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page