Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.
DPI for images on book cover?? Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
Search Search Module
Collapse

Advertisement Advertisement Module
Collapse

Featured Images Featured Images Module
Collapse

Mediabistro Creative Sites Mediabistro Creative Sites Module
Collapse
Latest Topics Latest Topics Module
Collapse

  • B
    Comment on Graphic Design tutorials
    B
    It's sort of the Dadaist approach to design, I guess.
    Yesterday, 11:48 PM
  • B
    Reply to General Branding (Re-branding)
    B
    You're engaging in linear thinking and being too literal about it. If you've settled on working with the idea of "pride," keep in mind that it's an emotional state and not a physical thing....
    Yesterday, 11:40 PM
  • Buda
    Reply to Graphic Design tutorials
    Buda
    The style reminds of cut and paste punk posters of the 1970s. I think the thing about those posters is they were kind of anti-design.
    Yesterday, 11:31 PM
  • Buda
    Comment on What do you want to know?
    Buda
    I think rabbits are going to be the next cats. You should do a series of videos about rabbits that are freelance graphic designers and the business issues they face.
    Yesterday, 11:29 PM
  • Buda
    Comment on What do you want to know?
    Buda
    I had that happen to me once in my life. I wasn't even dreaming. I couldn't replicate the situation again though. Maybe it was my unicorn.
    Yesterday, 11:28 PM
Advertisement Advertisement Module
Collapse

Sponsors Sponsors Module
Collapse

X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DPI for images on book cover??

    I don't know if this necessarily belongs in this forum, but I didn't know where to post. I need a DPI remedial course. I am probably making this harder than what is has to be. Here is my situation. I am designing this book cover, and the image I want to use is on iStock. They give me four options:

    425 x 282 px
    5.9" x 3.9" @ 72 DPI

    849 x 565 px
    11.8" x 7.8" @ 72 DPI

    1698 x 1131 px
    5.7" x 3.8" @ 300 DPI

    3504 x 2336 px
    11.7" x 7.8" @ 300 DPI


    The image only needs to be 380*253 (give or take). In any case, my logic tells me that since this is going to print (book cover), it is better to go higher DPI (thus higher resolution), and scale down? Meaning take the 5.7 x 3.8, edit it, then scale down. Is that train of thought correct?

    I guess where I am getting confused is the part where I shrink the image. Say I want to use another image for the spine. Spine images are relatively small, so does the same principle apply? Should I get 300dpi and scale down, or just get the smaller one at 72?

  • #2
    When you say 380x253, I'm assuming you mean pixels. Your printed imagesshould be 300 dpi, so after hitting the calculator and dividing by 300, the image itself would be 1.26" by 0.84"? If that's the case, you can use one of the smaller images and just change the resolution to 300 dpi in PS (with Resample Image UNchecked). The pixel information won't change, just how many pixels will fit per inch.
    ___________
    Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me.

    blog/portfolio

    Comment


    • #3
      if its offset then you need at least 300dpi.

      If you printing digitally you need at least 150dpi.

      The general rule is you can allows go smaller but, not larger without sacrifing either the size or resolution. For example, a 20 x 20 image at 150dpi can be scaled to 10 x 10 and that will make it 300dpi. You could also go up and scale it to 40 x 40 but, that would make is 150/2 = 75 dpi. The scaling factor is around here somewhere. If you search scaling factor on this forum there is a big discussion on this. The higher the resolution the better.

      Comment


      • #4
        theory behind it all:





        reference thread:
        http://www.graphicdesignforum.com/fo...ase+image+size

        Comment


        • #5
          Thank you guys. That answered my question. I am definitely saving this!!
          Last edited by 6thSense; 08-15-2007, 05:10 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Wow, talk about convoluted and slightly impractical tZ...LOL. But you do get there eventually...assuming you are scanning a 5x7 color transparency on a drum scanner, not actually starting with a digital file. Trust me you aren't going to be taking a 5x7, 300dpi digital image up to 180"h. Or scanning a photo on a flatbed either. Or printing something that big at 300dpi ya, ya, illustrative purposes.
            Last edited by PrintDriver; 08-15-2007, 05:50 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by PrintDriver
              Wow, talk about convoluted tZ...but you do get there eventually...assuming you are scanning a 5x7 color transparency on a drum scanner, not actually starting with a digital file. Trust me you aren't going to be taking a 5x7, 300dpi digital image up to 180"h. Or scanning a photo on a flatbed either.

              To be honest, I am at work and...heck, blame it on lack of sleep. lol. Was up late last night watching Fracture with the Mrs.

              I believe I need it at 380 x 253. I can't remember the exact size. I dunno where I came up with the 5x7. Sorry.

              Comment


              • #8
                No I was talking to tZ... I'm sorry for the pseudo-hijack.
                You do understand the difference in resolution using pixels as opposed to inches yes?
                How big is the image going to be on your book cover in inches?

                Comment


                • #9
                  You mentioned that one of the photo size options iStock gave you was a 5.7" x 3.8", but I think PD was just commenting on tZ's example.
                  ___________
                  Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me.

                  blog/portfolio

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    In pixels 380 x 253 is about 5"x3.5"
                    However when you say 380 pixels you are talking at <usually>72dpi or pixels per inch in this case.
                    For a 300dpi image you would need to use the 3rd option in the list to cover your resolution needs. So you really need at least 1698x1131 photo. I can't make this make sense if you don't understand the relationship between pixels and 'dpi'...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      hmmm. Man, I would have to be at home with Illustrator up. It is a 6x9 book, and the image will be approximatley.......I dunno, 2.5 inches wide maybe?

                      This will be the image I will use (minus the font). Well, the font will be there, but not the font listed. See, I posted it in another forum to get tips for techniques to make the text appear like the newspaper article, and this one guy tweaked it (as shown).

                      So to answer your question, I don't want it to consume the full back, just a portion. However, I do want the font to be legible (when I am complete).

                      That make sense?
                      Attached Files

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The other problem you may encounter is that if you are working in pixels and you don't have the right file resolution to start with when you open your starting file in Photoshop, you may inadvertently start at too low a res and all items brought into that file will have the same low res.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          lol

                          I made that a long while ago but, yeah.

                          That one time I forget at least its hear instead of digging through my thousands of folders with no relevant names once so ever,lol.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by PrintDriver
                            The other problem you may encounter is that if you are working in pixels and you don't have the right file resolution to start with when you open your starting file in Photoshop, you may inadvertently start at too low a res and all items brought into that file will have the same low res.
                            Starting at 300 should be ok though, right? For the size I am estimating?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Always use the highest res file that you can get your hands on (within reason). It gives much better quality even if you downsample a little rather than up-rezzing. I strongly discourage up-rezzing any image.

                              Comment

                              Mediabistro A division of Prometheus Global Media home | site map | advertising/sponsorships | careers | contact us | help courses | browse jobs | freelancers | content | member benefits | reprints & permissions terms of use | privacy policy Copyright © 2014 Mediabistro Inc.
                              Working...
                              X