Insert pics with different dpis

In article ,
"Nicolas Tade" wrote:

I am creating a new document which has 300 dpi. Now 75% of the picture will be my own creation, therefore I wanted to choose a high quality and print it out afterwards. But at the upper right corner I want to insert a picture from the web. This has only 72 dpi, but is so complex that I do not want to recreate it myself. But when I insert this picture with copy and paste, it seems to shrink!

Yes, that is correct.

I think this is due to the different resolution but do not exactly understand why.

Think of all Photosop pictures as tile mosaics. That is all they are; a pixel is nothing but a tiny square of solid color, just like a tile in a tile mosaic.

What does "resolution" mean? What does "300 pixels per inch" or "72 pixels per inch" mean?

It is a measure of how big every pixel is. It’s that simple; nothing more.

If a picture is 300 pixels per inch, that means it is made of tiny squares and each square is 1/300th of an inch wide. 300 pixels all in a row equal one inch. If a picture is 70 pixels per inch, it is made of squares and each square is 1/72 of an inch wide.

Now, let’s imagine that you have a picture that is 72 pixels wide. The picture is 100 pixels by 100 pixels. How big is it in print? Each pixel is 1/72 of an inch. There are 100 of them. It is a little less than one and a half inches wide.

You paste it into another picture that is 300 pixels per inch. It’s the same number of pixels–100 pixels wide and 100 pixels high. Now each pixel is smaller–now each pixel is 1/300th of an inch wide. That picture is now one-third of an inch wide and one-third of an inch high. You have kept the same number of pixels but you have made each pixel smaller. When you make each pixel smaller you make the picture smaller.

Which is the best way to overcome this?

You can’t.

That’s the other thing to understand about pictures that are made of pixels. Nothing, nothing, nothing can increase the total number of pixels without losing quality. It is not even theoretically possible.

Should I rescale it in the new
document or adjust the resolution in the original file (jpeg)? Or any better ways?

If you re-scale it in the new document or you resample the original image, the same thing is done–new pixels are created out of thin air. This degrades the quality of the image. It makes no difference how it’s done, in the new image or in the old; the end result is the same.

—
Art, photography, shareware, polyamory, literature, kink: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Now this is a good post.
Every beginner should print this out and hang it on the wall!

"Tacit" wrote in message

In article ,
"Nicolas Tade" wrote:

I am creating a new document which has 300 dpi. Now 75% of the picture

will

be my own creation, therefore I wanted to choose a high quality and

print it

out afterwards. But at the upper right corner I want to insert a picture from the web. This has only 72 dpi, but is so complex that I do not want

to

recreate it myself. But when I insert this picture with copy and paste,

it

seems to shrink!

Yes, that is correct.

I think this is due to the different resolution but do not exactly understand why.

Think of all Photosop pictures as tile mosaics. That is all they are; a pixel is nothing but a tiny square of solid color, just like a tile in a tile mosaic.

What does "resolution" mean? What does "300 pixels per inch" or "72 pixels per inch" mean?

It is a measure of how big every pixel is. It’s that simple; nothing more.

If a picture is 300 pixels per inch, that means it is made of tiny squares and each square is 1/300th of an inch wide. 300 pixels all in a row equal one inch. If a picture is 70 pixels per inch, it is made of squares and each square is 1/72 of an inch wide.

Now, let’s imagine that you have a picture that is 72 pixels wide. The picture is 100 pixels by 100 pixels. How big is it in print? Each pixel is 1/72 of an inch. There are 100 of them. It is a little less than one and a half inches wide.

You paste it into another picture that is 300 pixels per inch. It’s the same number of pixels–100 pixels wide and 100 pixels high. Now each pixel is smaller–now each pixel is 1/300th of an inch wide. That picture is now one-third of an inch wide and one-third of an inch high. You have kept the same number of pixels but you have made each pixel smaller. When you make each pixel smaller you make the picture smaller.

Which is the best way to overcome this?

You can’t.

That’s the other thing to understand about pictures that are made of pixels. Nothing, nothing, nothing can increase the total number of pixels without losing quality. It is not even theoretically possible.

Should I rescale it in the new
document or adjust the resolution in the original file (jpeg)? Or any

better

ways?

If you re-scale it in the new document or you resample the original image, the same thing is done–new pixels are created out of thin air. This degrades the quality of the image. It makes no difference how it’s done, in the new image or in the old; the end result is the same.
—
Art, photography, shareware, polyamory, literature, kink: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

On 5/9/05 10:01 AM, in article
, "Tacit"
spewed:

If you re-scale it in the new document or you resample the original image, the same thing is done–new pixels are created out of thin air. This degrades the quality of the image. It makes no difference how it’s done, in the new image or in the old; the end result is the same.

I’d just like to nit-pick and say that pixels don’t change size, regardless of the resolution of the picture. That’s why a 300 ppi image looks to be the same quality as a 72 ppi image on your ~72 ppi monitor, and where the confusion for newbies enters the picture, so to speak.
—
Jeff ‘The Wizard of Draws’ Bucchino

Cartoons with a Touch of Magic
http://www.wizardofdraws.com

More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

If you re-scale it in the new document or you resample the original image, the same thing is done–new pixels are created out of thin air. This degrades the quality of the image. It makes no difference how it’s done, in the new image or in the old; the end result is the same.

Thanks.
I mean, if I rescale the object in the new high resolution windows by mouse (click and pull) and if I use the PS window dialog to adjust the whole low resolution document before copy&paste, this really generates the same output?
Because there are so many methods like bi-linear, repetition, bi-cubic and so on resampling methods. Both mentioned ways use surely the same method?

Thank you!
Nico

On Mon, 09 May 2005 19:55:35 -0400, Wizard of Draws
wrote:

On 5/9/05 10:01 AM, in article
, "Tacit"
spewed:

If you re-scale it in the new document or you resample the original image, the same thing is done–new pixels are created out of thin air. This degrades the quality of the image. It makes no difference how it’s done, in the new image or in the old; the end result is the same.

I’d just like to nit-pick and say that pixels don’t change size, regardless of the resolution of the picture. That’s why a 300 ppi image looks to be the same quality as a 72 ppi image on your ~72 ppi monitor, and where the confusion for newbies enters the picture, so to speak.

Except of course, that hardly any monitor uses 72 ppi anymore…

—

Hecate – The Real One

Fashion: Buying things you don’t need, with money
you don’t have, to impress people you don’t like…