Yes, I agree. I go to a dentist to receive professional dental treatment from a trained doctor. When the dentist's office looks more like a McDonald's playland than a high-tech medical office, I don't...
If I have a design that is at 72 dpi, and I would like to print it, so I would change the dpi in the adjustments in photoshop to 300 to an image, will it become pixalized when printed? Like, does it really change the look when printed when you make it 300dpi?
For example, the original size for: http://www.flickr.com/photos/estheti...94418/sizes/o/
If the the 72ppi image dimensions are about 4.1 x the dimensions of the print dimensions then you can change the resolution without any loss of quality. Otherwise, you will probably lose a noticeable amount of quality. It would depend on whether the image is close to 4.1 x the output dimensions. The closer to that ratio the less loss of quality.
If you have an image that is 1200 x 1200 @ 72ppi you may can increase the resolution to 300ppi without any/much loss of quality, but the dimensions will become 300 x 300 or close to it rounding down. If you have an image that is 1in x 1in at 72ppi then in order to print at 300dpi the image would need to become .25in x .25in rounding down.
DPI stand for dots per inch.... So if you change something that has 72 dots per inch to 300, there are going to be 228 dots missing in every inch.
Think of a 1 inch long line made up of 72 dots, if you keep it one inch long, but reduce the size of the dots so that 300 will now fit in the same space, maybe you can visualise all the missing information. You would have to shrink it down to about 1/4 the size to keep the quality. If you want to keep it the same size, you will need to fill in the gaps.
Photoshop will try to emulate the missing information, and does ok to a point, but there is only so far you can stretch something before the loss in quality is noticeable.
I have had some success with using Alien Skin's BlowUp software, but that was for very large format printing and that is seen from a distance anyway, yours may look fine with the software but who knows.
at the risk of going out on a limb here, i have a question. that's a nice looking image. did you build it, or create it? i mean, did you use a brush and create the smoke effects on the far left and right of the images, and then use a paint spatter brush in the background, or did you take a few bezier curves, blur and glow them, and then make the design?
Lets pretend you have a straight black like that is 1 meter long and 1 pixel in thickness at 72 resolution.
If you turn that line into a 300 resolution 1 meter long line you'll end up with a DASHED line since 228 pixels have no color information to fill in.
Now if you had that 1 meter line (100 cm ) and turned that into a quarter of a meter (25 cm) at 300 resolution you'd have a unbroken line at 300 resolution with no loss of quality.
Basically. You can't add resolution to a image and have it stay at the same size without losing quality. Resolution only works one direction.
To give you an idea what it would look like just remember what old 8-bit video games were like. You'd end up with something like that if you went from 72 up to 300 resolution. Mario here will illustrate my point of what your image will turn into if you dont shrink it.
Unchecking the image resampling box will show you what the actual dimensions of the printed image will be when printed at 300 dpi.
Imagine, if you will, that you have a photo, and access to a copier. If you copy that image at its actual size, you'll more or less get the same quality (factoring in the quality of the copier, of course). If you blow that image up on the copier, say 400%, you'll get a fuzzy copy. It's the same basic principle.
"Lucy, you got some 'splainin' to do!" - Ricky Ricardo