Hot answers tagged scaling
In the Preferences > General area, make sure Scale Strokes & Effects is selected.
The Lowest Common Denominator vs. Highest Common Factor Approach™ Define how much available space you have by creating, placing, and balancing empty elements within your design. I chose to use the Golden Ratio for the above (100px x 161px) because it's better to work with a horizontal rectangle, than it is with a perfect square based on most logos being ...
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 ...
Photoshop interpolates pixels. This means when you scale in Photoshop, Photoshop uses mathematical algorithms to determine either the best pixels to remove (if reducing) or the best color pixels to add (if enlarging). When you scale a raster image in Photoshop you alter the pixels of the image itself. Illustrator does not interpolate pixels. Illustrator ...
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):
Ignoring the how old the onlooker might be, how high up, low down, indoors, artificial light or not, dark train stations, weather, is it a print sign or a screen, reflective road sign etc etc. There are a few tools that will help you calculate this, and there are some best practices. If you really want to get into this, your keyword will be signage. ...
These four options define how to scale the image. Each option describes an algorithm used to do this. See image sampling. None: The nearest-neighbor algorithm is used. There is no smoothing after scaling. Linear: Touching pixels average their values. Cubic: Touching pixels average their values so central pixels maintain the most value. Lanczos: Pixels are ...
The very short answer is "No." Oldstyle figures ("lowercase") are specifically drawn that way. Legacy Postscript and TrueType fonts, for the most part, contain only tabular figures, which are lining or oldstyle according to the way the font is designed. The Unicode Consortium isn't suggesting that lining figures can be distorted into oldstyle figures, ...
I think in that particular example you should scale the two logos both to one reference which is the text ... because when it comes with aligning two logos having texts, you should consider the text proportions first. and in your example the two fonts of the logos looks similar. align the text to the same base line scale the two text in logos to have the ...
Select the triangle and go to "Object" -> "Expand Appearance."
Illustrator has horizontal and vertical scale options just like Photoshop. But because Adobe are... special... they thought it would be fun to hide a lot of their settings and leave no clue that they are there. Open up the flyout menu with the button at the top right of the character settings window. Choose "Show options", which is Adobe speak for "Stop ...
First... Align to Pixel Grid is indeed checked in your file. Actually it is hyphenated indicating some objects are set to align to the pixel grid and some objects are not. Select all and then uncheck it on the Transform panel. If you don't see it on the Transform Panel, click the menu icon on the Transform Panel and choose "Show Options". You will then have ...
Further to Jin's answer, you can maintain scaled appearance properties by checking the Scale Strokes & Effects box on the Transform palette.
Sounds like your display performance is on the low setting. In your InDesign document, go to the top menu View > Display performance and choose High quality display. The lower settings exists when working with heavy documents, it improves performance. Hope this helps!
Ok, I've worked this one out. Photoshop has a single, global setting to determine the scaling algorithm used, for everything. It is in Preferences > General > Image Interpolation. Setting this will make all image scale transforms use this algorithm. So set this to nearest neighbour, perform the scale, change it back, is the rather tedious solution. UPDATE ...
I would take a different approach to this, because the task is like wishing for the moon. There's no unicorn filter in Photoshop yet. (And I'm surprised nobody has so far pointed out that Photoshop's pixel limit for a PSD is 30,000 in either dimension, so 86,400 would only be achievable by slicing the image into separate files and enlarging those.) The ...
You'll want to scale first. Downsizing the image will compress your palette to some extent in and of itself. Indexing before hand would throw color away that may be helpful in the down-sampling step.
There are too many variables for one answer. The first thing to evaluate is the typeface. If you are using a face designed for signage, the general references Ilan provided are probably roughly accurate. On the other hand, if you're working on a branded piece where the typography is part of a larger brand standard, you'll have to do your own research. The ...
One way is to use the Scale window from Object > Transform > Scale but with only Transform Patterns ticked. If it seems to not work, make sure the selection isn't grouped. To apply this to everything a pattern is applied to, first select something that has the pattern, then Select > Same > Fill color.
I work at a nonprofit and have to do this frequently when including sponsor organizations, etc. on flyers and invitations. What I generally do is start by sizing the logos so the type sizes are equal, and then tweaking individually based on the overall size of the logos in proportion to eachother.
Note that most of the following is nothing but an educated guess. I do not know what actually motivated the Typeplate scale If you mulitply 18 repeatedly with ∛2 ≈ 1.26 you get the following sequence which, when rounded to “standard” font sizes yields the Typeplate scale with some exceptions: 18.0 → 18 22.7 → 21 28.6 → 24 – This is out of place, 28 would ...
The absolute best way to work is create the document using only vector shapes, layer styles and (if you have to) Smart Objects that are high enough resolution to cover the @2x size. If constructed properly, your document can be scaled up and down with no loss at all — Photoshop will rerender shapes and layer styles at size, so they'll be as good as ...
As you probably know, the viewing distance of two feet is ludicrous. If people were going to view whatever this is from two feet, it wouldn't need to be 34 feet tall. When people get up close to something that big, they're used to seeing image issues. From a reasonable distance (20 plus feet?), Scott has the right idea. Depending on the photo, the ...
I would scale then Index - I can't think of a technical reason why, but.. If in doubt try it both ways, it won't take long and you can compare them both afterwards to see which best fits the purpose. [added]: Scale, then index: Index, then scale:
Press cmd+T to transform. Scaling is one of the basic transformation tools.
Please look at these resources Distance Legibility Chart additional explanation crazy resource also, you probably want to learn what the visual acuity is... If you want to calculate the proper 20/20 letter size based on distance you can use this formula: tan(5 minutes) = distance in feet/20 but it is not the BEST letter size, only the size that a ...
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
Off the bat.. Place image in Adobe Illustrator Use the Live Trace feature to convert the photo to vectors Scale all you want. It's best to import the photo as large as possible to get as much detail as possible with Live Trace. And Live Trace tends to work better if photos are not exceptionally intricate. But it's a possible solution. Sticking with ...
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 ...
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.
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible