Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

26

Just think of pixel like Atom, Atom is a smallest particle of matter. Where as Pixel is a smallest particle of Digital Image. Atom has Neutron, Proton & Electron where as Pixel has Red, Green & Blue values :) Number of pixels per Inches or CM etc... is called the Resolution Higher Resolution means More pixels per unit of length like. If you are ...


15

The answer applies both to vector and to rasterized icons. If quality matters, you can't. Large icons contain more details. Those details, which are nice on a 128×128 icon, would be disturbing on a 32×32 icon; instead of helping visually identify the icon, they will do the opposite. For example, a large icon of a keyboard may contain every key of the ...


10

If a client of mine asked for a 1920x1080px image, the first thing I need to know the intended use. Is it for the web, print, or both? In the print world, a pixel (or picture element - [pict-el]) has no meaning or definition. Pixels can not be measured in any way. They have no predefined size or unit in order to calculate their size. Therefore are not a ...


9

If you need to scale images up at the ratio you're describing, it's practically necessary to work with vector images rather than raster images. The main difference is that raster images are made up of pixels, discrete dots of a fixed size, whereas vector images are described by geometric paths. The essential point is that vector images can be scaled up ...


6

There is more information that is required before you question can be answered accurately. However, you may not fully understand the difference between the Type objects that Illustrator creates. Depending on how you use the Type tool, 3 different basic type objects will be created: Type in an Area This is the type "in frames" that Alan refers to. It can ...


5

To a degree..... With the exception of Live Type, Photoshop creates vector containers with raster fills. What this means is the edges of shape layers will remain crisp and clear when resized because the shape/vector layer edge is saved as a vector and it is recalculated when resized. However, what is inside the shape layer is not vector. For example, if ...


5

If you don't want your screen shot to be blurry, open the screen shot in PhotoShop, then go to image size, increase the size x2 in each dimension, and then choose 'nearest neighbor' as the interpolation option. The end result will be an image 4 times larger but the pixels will remain aliased and you won't get the blurring.


5

Select the Artboard Tool on the Tool bar. You can then click an artboard and change it's size with the options in the Control bar across the top of the screen. Another method is to highlight the artboard in the Artboard Panel (Window > Artboards) and choose Artboard Options from the Panel menu.


5

There is a computer science paper (really, fun memo) titled, "A pixel is not a little square" by Alvoy Ray Smith. A pixel is a point sample. It exists only at a point. For a color picture, a pixel might actually contain three samples, one for each primary color contributing to the picture at the sampling point. We can still think of this as a point ...


4

320 / 541 = .591 (that is, 320 pixels is 59.1% of 541 pixels) 600 * .591 = 354.6 (so 354.6 is 59.1% of 600) rounded up to 355 pixels There's your width; do the same calculations for the height. //edit for height: 240 / 341 = .704 449 * .704 = 316.1 round down to 316px


4

As Horatio says, if it looks good, it's probably fine. There are two schools of thought on upsampling: One says, "Never, ever upsample"; the other says, "Hey, what the heck, upsampling rocks." In almost all cases I side with the former. Upsampling adds nothing but "best guesses" to the image. It specifically doesn't add any image information (I don't care ...


4

I'm betting that the photo of the girl is killing your size right now. To test that, remove her frame and replace it with one of the other frames of your animation. I'll bet the size drops quite a bit. Animated GIFs are best kept small by keeping their color pallets limited, and avoiding continuous tone graphics (photos, gradients, opacity shifts, etc.). ...


4

Converting to a smart object won't change the quality when the image is reduced, it will only allow you to resize the image afterwards back to normal without loss of quality. Convert to smart object anyway, as it's good practice. Go to Settings -> General Change 'Image Interpolation' to 'Bicubic sharper' see if that helps maintain some detail.


4

Essentially, you have to draw or re-draw your small icon. Ideally you work from a vector based version that you scale down and then tweak the details on pixel-level, but scaling down a rastered version will work, too. Your scaling results will be better, if you scale exactly 50%, 25%, 12.5%, etc, because photoshop has to blur less between pixels. ...


4

Sticking to simple, pre-generated textures, you'll either have to allow some stretching, or allow some slightly awkward overlaps. I believe both ways will need some custom code though. Using stretching: Place corner caps, round the number of bubble tiles needed to fit in between up or down, and stretch (or shrink) that span to make up the difference: ...


4

You really don't need any scripting for this. Select text object with Selection Tool Add new fill via Appearance Panel Move new fill below characters Highlight new fill and choose Effect > Convert to Shape > Rectangle Enter relative amount of points/pixels/inches etc. you want the rectangle to be offset from the text click OK drag the text object to ...


4

800 pixels by 800 pixels and need to convert them in Photoshop to 72 ppi for web use (at the same size: 800px by 800px). There's no conversion to do. If they're 800 pixels by 800 pixels, that's it, they're the size you need. However, 300ppi at 800px by 800px is like a 2.3" by 2.3" picture, so are you sure the files are currently at 800pixels by ...


4

The term "pixel" is short for "picture element". An image has consists of pixels, which are just colored dots in a rectangle, with no size. To show the image, we use a screen that can show colored dots, and need to decide which dots we want to show where. Looking at the details, the image consists of separate dots, each with a separate color. Like when ...


4

One more confusion to complete the discussion: In website design and layout, one "CSS pixel" is always equal to 1/96th of a "CSS inch", regardless of screen resolution. This was done because so many early websites used pixel-based measurements for layout assumed a standard screen resolution. In order that the actual size of text and other content ...


3

You can enable snap to pixel when creating shapes. You can also enable the grid and set the grid lines to X pixels with X subdivisions. You can also align your objects to whole pixels and set their height/width to whole pixels. As well, you can use the marquee tool to select the bounding box of your object and create guides around it that your object can be ...


3

This is one of those cases where it's a good idea to plan things out beforehand and do some math. There is no way to take a 128x128 image and reduce it to 40x40 such that your lines will end up as whole pixels, nor aligned with pixel boundaries. You also can't take a one-pixel line, reduce it to 40/128 (5/16ths) of its original size and still have a ...


3

There's a script for that. (this is probably the script Joonas' comment alludes to - works just fine in CS6). (to then fit the art board after fitting the text box, use the art board tool and click on the text box) Courtesy of Kelso Cartography who have loads of great scripts (their scripts to switch point and area text are also highly recommended), you ...


3

This particular set is composed of shapes and text, so resizing is not going to impact quality, but you can't just downsize these icons. An icon is a special kind of infographic. Its purpose is to communicate easily-recognized information at any given size, so your first step, before you start scaling anything, is to identify what parts of the icon carry the ...


3

In general you have three basic possibilities: 1) Increase your picture's dimensions (on the shortest side) to make it square (As Lauren suggested) 2) Crop them to be square (As DA01 suggested) 3) Stretch your images to fit a square All three of them have their pros and cons of course. The first one makes it square, but it adds useless "information". ...


3

There's a script for that by the awesome John Wundes (no affiliation). It's called Set ALL the things, explained here, and lets you set width and height for selected objects. It can set a whole bunch of other values for selected items, too, if you know the names for them (or, if you look up their names in the Illustrator Scripting Guide or in that ...


3

Never rely on any print provider to do anything other than spit out your file as it currently exists. I would never trust that something will be output in a specific manner to ensure it is as I expect. If you have to provide instructions or notes on how to output, then it's a recipe for error. If you place a 25ppi image in Indesign it never gets "upsampled" ...


3

slice the image above and below the '>' then move the three portions to top, centre, bottom, then either copy and paste a section from the top or bottom pieces (before the rounded corner) and place those in the gab - or take a 1 pixel slice and stretch it between the gaps ( though the latter is less advisable ) if you have any obvious cut lines, use the ...


3

There was a time (10-15 years ago) when sticking to specific percentages was helpful. Often 125% or 75% were best. You would simply repeat enlargements or reductions at this percentage until you got close to the size you wanted then the final step would match the desired final size. This resulted in sharper, clearer, pixels since less interpolation was ...


3

I've tried under Windows with your version and with the most recent one and it works as usual. In order to maintain the border stroke while scaling the object, the first button should be up (in your screenshot seems to be down, i.e. the stroke is scaled with the object):


2

Really two questions, here. Broad answer: You're confusing Photoshop and Illustrator. They don't use the same shortcuts and they don't handle text frames the same way. The keyboard shortcut in Illustrator for Free Transform is E. Ctl+T is the Photoshop shortcut. As to the font stretching, it sounds like you're using point type (not in a box) or the Free ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible