hp monitor question?
- Started
- Last post
- 26 Responses
- kld0
acescence,
just sent you a side by side comparison to your email(no ftp access right now). take a look. I think your experiment isn't showing the real results because you are starting with the same image at 72 dpi(screenshots). Maybe you could post what I sent for all to see.
- acescence0
actually, my screen takes screenshots at 72.009 dpi, many do. that's the original dpi i started with.
that file you sent is meaningless, send me the original file.
whatever you think you did to fix it, you're mistaken.- not meaningless, that is exactly what I see onscreen. one is fucked the other isn't.kld
- kld0
haha, whatever. It went from looking pixelated to looking crisp so I'm satisfied.
- fyoucher10
The main mistake people make are they get mixed up with PPI and DPI.
DPI for PRINT !!!!
- acescence0
DPI is meaningless on screen. I don't think that's your problem. for web stuff, you can set DPI to anything you want... only pixel dimensions matter.
- kld0
When I start a web project I sent up my psds at 72 ppi so that there is a 1 to 1 relationship from my working file and the target media which is also 72 ppi. The 4 column template file I grabbed off the web was set to 72.009 PPI which looked fucked for anything that should have been exactly 1 px wide, hence the frustration.
when I started fresh with a psd set to 72ppi everything was crisp and clear.
- acescence0
ok, this is your critical error. dpi does not set the relationship of pixels in a file to pixels onscreen. 1 pixel in an image will always equal 1 pixel onscreen. there is nothing you can do to change this unless you change the pixel dimensions of the file and resample it.
here's the file you sent at 72dpi and 72.009dpi. I can't remember which is which because they look exactly the same!
- open in a new window, as they're getting resized in the img tag here...acescence
- chrisone0
Could the DPI affect how Photoshop previews non-bitmap data? (shape layers etc.)
- DrBombay0
KLD is talking about how it looked inside of photoshop. Nothing else.
- acescence0
and those are screenshots from inside photoshop.
btw- the file you just sent, was that supposed to be the blurry one? single pixel lines look ok there.
- kld0
let's just forget about it, there's some weirdness going on but it all good now and I'm having a hard time recreating it outside of that one psd. thanks all!
- acescence0
this is what I was talking about earlier, re changing dpi with a hex editor, as it's just metadata..
- kld0
no worries, I grabbed a 4 column grid .psd template off the interwebs and it was set to 72.009 px. Made it render onscreen pixelated. I also happened to get a new monitor at around the same time and had been scratching my head trying to figure it out. I should have looked at the image size dialog box earlier. Or just create my own template.
- acescence0
um, i will repeat, dpi has nothing to do with what you see on screen. an image will render exactly the same whether it's 1.009 dpi or 1200000 dpi. you are mistaken.
- acescence0
- you are resampling the image though.johndiggity
- it's just meta data, you can open an image in a hex editor and change itacescence
- you probably had to save for web to make these and that would make them 72 px/inch which is native screen res. Not 72.009px/inch which would make a 1 px line look pixelated apparently.kld
- 72.009 which looks pixelated on screen.kld
- I invite you to download the images, open in PS, and see for yourselfacescence
- orrinward0
I don't understand how DPI is such a common misconception. I found it even amongst colleagues in a Digital Media department... I'd be told to do some monkey work with photos FOR WEB and be told I had to redo them because they saw it was at 300DPI... When I showed images in 300DPI but were 800X600 pixels and images that were 72DPI at 800X600 they actually said 'I notice the difference, it's just subtle'.
First year of Uni with the jokes that were Photoshop Tutorials we were always told to work at 300DPI, but always specified dimensions in pixels...
- kld0
the issue was computer screens dont display fractions of pixels, therefore a 1 px line looked blurry at 72.009 px/inch. once the file was set to 72 px/inch all was well. Not sure what there is argue about here, it looked like shit, now it doesn't.