Preserved Topic: Working big????? (Page 1 of 1)

Every says you should work big when you create graphics(and resize the image when your done).

The problem for me working this way is that it often destroys the picture when I downscale it. Especially stokes etc gets messed up real bad(maybe its better if I turn antialiasing off).

Comments?

True, true, true, and even a bit more true after that. Go read the other thread in this forum called 'Small pictures' or something like that to see how to avoid this problem.




Don't make me come down there! - God

Personally I create graphics usually in the size thats needed. However, if something needs to be really small I do work bigger but not humungously bigger and then resize it ...

I thought working big made sense too.. But you know whtas easier? Zoom in on the image, and use smaller brushes and such. That way, you don't lose (as much) quality when you shrink it.

- Dan -

Important lesson here: If "everyone" says something, and it turns out not to be true, then --- it's not true!

It's a matter of degree. If I work on an image for print, and I scan it at, let's say arbitrarily, 450 DPI, spot, retouch, whatever,and then sample it to 300 DPI, the retouching sort of blends in better. That's smart. But if I took that 5x7x300 DPI file, especially if it had crisp edges or type, and tried to make a 2x3x72 DPI web graphic, it falls to ruin. So listen to "everyone", and then find what works for you. Teeny tiny web graphics have their own rules!

Depends on what you're doing. The reason people suggest resizing down is that it hides details. This is great if you're trying to hide the brush strokes of a photo-retouch, for example. It also tends to make airbrushing look better, for everyone except very skilled artists.
A comprimise might be to do the airbrushing, lighting effects, etc. at a larger size.
Then resize down and add text and line graphics at the target image size.

I actually do what Dan said... I work in 200% zoom and in extreme cases 400% then I use the single pixel thingy very acuratly and when I put it back it's all good..


tskull@techie.com">

Gotta agree with Dan too(Ive learned that the hard way <img border=0 align=absmiddle src="http://www.ozones.com/forum/smile.gif">. 3d stuff etc -> work big. text, stroking etc work at the res you want your final product at.

I was just so damn pissed after working ALOT on a picture and cant use it for anything now <img border=0 align=absmiddle src="http://www.ozones.com/forum/frown.gif">

I always work at the size I need things in. Want nice sharp edges? Make nice sharp edges. Resampling will always distort things. The bitch is when you design something for the screen, and then need to print it big. I remember the VISI logo, I did it small, looked great, then we needed a magazine ad. I had to re-do the effects from scratch. Then we moved to a nicer magazine, higher dpi. Re-did it once more, even bigger. Happy, happy, but then we did the TRADE SHOW BOOTH! Final print, something like 12,000 pixels square, wouldn't fit on a ZIP disk, had to burn a CD. THIS one was finally big enough for everything we ever did with it! Live and learn, work at the resolution that fits your end result. Logos, best to work big. Web interfaces? Work at 72 dpi, typically.

Your pal, -doc-

Gotta go with the Doc on this one.

I've worked in print, and web work, and learning to work at the size of my end result for any graphics was a tough, but necessary lesson.

I make one addendum to that, in that photo retouching, I usually do at 150 - 200% of my end result, but then shrink, only to preserve realism, and remove any pixelation that may appear (which of course never does..~buffs lapels~...uh...yeah)

Anyway, the point being that I also prefer crisp graphics, and hate to let any data loss, or anti aliasing during resize ruin anything that I worked hard to create. Anything that needs to be quite small, (especially icons, or web nav buttons etc.) ABSOLUTELY should be made small to begin with. There's nothing more horrid than making great smilies, then shrinking them, and watching them turn to muddled blurry messes with no definition.

Unless it's vector art, then just throw my previous opinion to the birds...hehe

<img border=0 align=absmiddle src="http://www.ozones.com/forum/biggrin.gif">

Peter



ICQ:# 10237808

[This message has been edited by DarkGarden (edited 05-09-2000).]

It seems to me that is where the pen tool comes in handy. You can design parts of the image at the resolution you need for the web, then drag the path to a new image at the resolution for printing.

I will often design one of the major componetnts of my design with the pen tool and drag the path between image when I need to change resolution.

Because the path is a vector, you don't loose anything when you change the image resolution.