Has anyone had a problem with type appearing very distorted in Photoshop 7.0? I upgraded to Windows XP and Photoshop 7.0 about a year ago. Everything has worked well on Photoshop until about two weeks ago when I began having a problem with type looking distorted or pixeled(it looks like you can see each individual block of color that makes up the letter). Not only do you see it on the print from the printer, but you can see it on the screen. I have a document that had both text and photos that was created two months ago. It does not have that effect. I tried to copy the photos and text from that document to a new document and it produced this pixeled effect in the new document. I know this could happen if I enlarged the type, but it is small. I am only making an 8 X 10 flyer. When I print the document that I tried to copy from, it prints perfectly. It also makes this pixeled effect when I just try to type something new on a new document.
I thought it might be the printer, but two different printers produce the same effect. Also, the documents that I made two months ago still print correctly. I have looked in the FAQ’s and chats and cannot find this topic. I re-installed PS 7.0 and got the 7.0.1 upgrade. Still no change. I have not made any changes to the computer in the past several months. My computer has 192 MB of Ram. I know that is not huge, but I have not had problems to this point with Photoshop 7.0.
Can anyone give me any ideas what I should try to figure this out? Thank you! Susan
Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.
The specific original document that I mentioned was 13 X 19. The PPI was 150. Then I copied it and put it on a new (blank) document that was 8 1/2 X 11 to make a flyer. The PPI of the new document was also 150.
I also have the same problem when I try to create a new document and type directly on to it (instead of copying type from another document). Thanks. Susan
I am sorry that I did not explain pixels or inches. The document that I took it from was 13 inches by 19 inches (which would be 1950 pixels X 2850 pixels). I copied the text and photograph and put it on a new document that was 8 1/2 inches X 10 inches. Both the text and the photo appeared jagged and fuzzy. It also does the same thing if I have a new, blank document and I type on it. Thank you for your response. If you have any ideas, I would love to hear them. Susan
You have downsampled your original. Before dragging it into a new document, decide the size you want it to be in that new document. Then calculate the resolution it will have when resized WITHOUT RESAMPLING. Change the resolution of the target (receiving) document to match the calculated new resolution of the original. To do that, you will have to upsample the target without changing its physical size.
Perhaps, like a lot of my friends, you are turned off when asked to "calculate" anything. If so, let PS do that drudge work for you.
First, perform any cropping of the original you may want. Then go to Image > Size. With "Constrain Proportions" checked and "Resample Image" UNCHECKED, change either the width or height of the original to its desired new dimension. The other dimension will change automatically, and a new resolution will appear that uses all the original pixels in the cropped area. You do not discard ANY pixels from the original in this way, even though you are reducing the image’s physical size. (Pixel physical size changes, not the pixel count)
If the new resolution has a decimal part, round it off to an integer. Make note of that resolution value, switch to the image to which you will be moving the original, go to Image > Size again, check BOTH Resample and Constrain Proportions, and set Resolution to the value you noted.
Now when you drag the original onto the new document, there will be no loss of pixels and the crispness of any type it contains will be preserved or improved.
Thank you so much for your answer. I would not have been able to figure that out on my own. After I read your first message, I was confused about how I would calculate the resolution. Your next message makes it so much easier! Thank you, thank you! I will go do that. I love Photoshop when I can make it do what I want, but while I am trying to learn, sometimes I feel like I am trying to get a drink out of a fire hose.
When there is no resampling, the total number of pixels in the image remains constant. Thus, reducing the image’s physical size without resampling means the same number of pixels are jammed into a smaller space—the resolution in pixels per inch must then increase—it increases in inverse proportion to the image’s linear dimensions. Halving the width and height, for example, doubles the resolution. If you were going the other way, doubling the dimensions with no resampling would halve the resolution.
help! I am doing a 13"x19" folder in PS6. when the type prints out it shows all "pixilated" not as a "vector"not smooth…the type was composed directly on the page at the size…what to do??? Thanks Al
Probably your resolution is set to 72 or 96, which is fine for the screen, but not for printing. Up the resolution to 300 and it should print fine (make a test of printed text before you do a lot of work).
If you don’t already have enough pixels to get to 220-300ppi for your intended output size, you may be SOL. Leave resample OFF, change ppi to 300, see what image size you have. If not big enough, you have no choice but to resample (turn resample ON, and actually add interpolated pixels). Generally not up for prime time method.
thanks Mac, I increased the res to 300…it won’t save at 600 though. My pixels are 3899 x 5699. Some type but mostly very fine images of art. Don’t know if it will better on my cannon s9000. thanks
No if anything I reduced the size of the images. It all should print well now. I did a test of a piece of type and its fine.waiting for ink. Thank you Al
You still don’t have a handle on pixel size/image size/resampling.
If you need 1200 ppi at 13×19, you have to check resample. You will be ADDING (interpolating / upsampling) pixels. Alot of them. From nowhere. Not good. Also, a 13 x 19" file at 1200ppi is over a GB in size. Also also, there is no practical reason TO make a file of this ppi for any type printing purpose, 300ppi is generally more than ample, assuming these are original pixels and not interpolated.
Also also also, you DO need to study up on these concepts at scantips.com.
Thanks Mac I figured it all out thanks to you and this thread.I’m printing it at 300. To do otherwise, would reduce the size of each image and or resample each. I now realize that I must photograph the images as a larger file if the end use is to show "brush marks"in the painting, etc.
