Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

Techical Query -- put pics on CD for website of agency.

pentaxpete 13 636 1 United Kingdom
31 Jan 2011 11:16AM
Hi All -- have done a few shoots for clients wanting to be 'Extras' on film and TV and always did contacts + finished prints 10x8" size B&W then now I did shoot for client who wanted B&W pics put onto a CD for the agency web-site and although I can now 'Burn to CD' having been given a Nero software thingy didn't know what size JPegs or TIFFS even to put onto the disc and at what 'resolution'.The client didn't know eiher, so I asked the 'Digital Experts' at my Camera Club and THEY didn't know either !!
I told him for local newspapers I do 200 resolution ( Pentax K10D comes out at 72 Resolution and I change it to 200 to e-mail pics to newspaper)and I told him I do the longest side usually 1500 pixels long and that seems to be OK, so he said put the pics on disc the same -- so I scanned in 32 B&W negs from my 16-on Hasselblad and did 32 JPegs at 200 and 1500 pixels and then found there was still room on disc so I did the 32 TIFFS as well -- did I do RIGHT ??

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

keithh Plus
14 25.4k 33 Wallis And Futuna
31 Jan 2011 11:42AM
I'd have let your client have a 10x8 at 300ppi which would be 3000x2400.
StuartAt 13 1.1k 8 United Kingdom
31 Jan 2011 12:28PM
As Keith says, the ppi/dpi value is the physical realisation of a certain image size. If an image is 1500 pixels long, then at 300 ppi it will print at 1500/300 inches (5 inches). If printed at 72 ppi then it will print at 1500/72 (20-ish inches). The dpi/ppi has no meaning until the image is printed.

I just found this explanation which is quite good.
pentaxpete 13 636 1 United Kingdom
3 Feb 2011 11:55AM
Read that article by so much Maths, my worse subject ! But the client did not want the pics for printing, only to be viewed on a Web-site -- I can do traditional darkroom prints of he wants them printed .
John_Frid 12 514 57 United Kingdom
3 Feb 2011 12:44PM
Hi Pete,

I'm no expert, but my understanding is as follows. No doubt if I am talking rubbish then someone will come along and set the record straight.

I believe that most monitors display at 72 ppi (higher resolutions are available but not the norm). When working for the web it doesn't matter what dpi/ppi is used as the size it appears on a web site is determined by the number of pixels. The dpi/ppi is only relevant if the image is being physically printed.

As you know, when you upload an image to ePZ, the size is expressed as a maximum of 600 pixels on the longest side (or 1000 for e2 members). This translates to 8.33 inches for 600 pixels or 13.88 inches for 1000 pixels. So, as for what size the images need to be, you need to know how big the image will be when displayed on screen, and then work out how many pixels will be needed by multiplying the required size in inches by 72 (being the resolution of the monitor).

The other thing to consider if the size of the file (how many kb's). The size (in kb's) doesn't affect how big the image looks, but it does affect the quality of the image. The smaller the file size, the greater the compression has to be, and consequently the poorer the image quality may appear. How detrimental compression is to the image depends on a number of factors, and some images handle it better than others.

My advice for web images would be to save them as 8bit Jpeg's at 72 dpi using sRGB colour space. In the abscence of more specific client instructions I would probably re-size to 720 pixels on the longest side.

This should be perfect for web use.

User_Removed 8 1.4k England
3 Feb 2011 1:20PM

Quote: believe that most monitors display at 72 ppi (higher resolutions are available but not the norm).

No. Not since the 20th century.

Quote:You need to know how big the image will be when displayed on screen

No you dont, they are displayed at the resolution of the image. The physical size isn't something you can realisticly control on the web (and have no need too) , so we don't bother.

Yes to the KB compression of the image.

The decision of what digital size to give the client is up to you, the best option would obviously to give the native size with no reduction. However it helps to know if the images would ever be printed, or if they are going to exist digitally.

Very rough standards are:

Native res: for physical prints of which a maximum quality vs size can be determined.
640px for webpage and blog.
1024px for quick sharing
1600px for "digital prints", screensavers etc.
John_Frid 12 514 57 United Kingdom
3 Feb 2011 1:29PM
Excellent - someone who knew better came along Smile I knew my bumbling answer would flush out someone who could make sense of it all.
User_Removed 8 1.4k England
3 Feb 2011 3:07PM
They are very common misconceptions that are VERY wide spread even to the point of print companies and the BGPP themselves. So don't feel too out of the loop. Tongue

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.