Images

[Varsuuk]

Please point me to prior threads I should read ;) having trouble searching themout - best I found was discussion on shrinking them and Entrail's on max sizes.

OK - so I am trying to add images, some are "full page" images, like the cover that I was given. It is 8.5 x 11 when I load it in PS, it appears to be 200dpi.

If I want it to look good in a "general module", i.e. one that may be sold in FG or DTRPG stores, how should I plan to initially size it?


I've said before, I am a graphics ignoramus. So don't assume I understand basics from dpi to ppi to psi...


I found that making it the 8.5x11 at 96dpi it is too big. My screen is a 2560x1440 27"(Dell Ultrasharp 2715 iir) so according to something I saw, that makes it 109ppi whatever the hell that means.


So... rules of thumb for "pictures" for players.
Rules of thumb on taking what is extracted from pdf via Acrobat to file if it is a map - 50px/square so what should I be using to size these things to match that?



I saw the recomendation is that images/maps not exceed 1MB for speed of loading. Is there a reason an image should be made lower quality than that even? or OK to save it at as high a quality as it doesn't reach 1MB?




Basically, I am putting together a module to be used by others, eventually for sale with permission/partnership of the Author. What do I need to know "graphics-wise" - I haven't had any issues thusfar with the story part - that's actually complete. Now linking in pictures/maps and finally will place encounters on those.

Don't want to go through trouble of that until know have the base images right.

[celestian]

There is a pretty lengthy discussion on this over here.

https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?36922-Modules-maps-Best-Practice

tldr; file reso should not be bigger that 2048x2048 and size 1meg or less are best practices.

[Zacchaeus]

Don't get caught up in dpi; just resize the image to fit in with the criteria that' specified in that thread that celestian pointed to. For general images that the DM might want to view and share change the side so that the maximum height is 800 or max width is 1000.

[Varsuuk]

Don't get caught up in dpi; just resize the image to fit in with the criteria that' specified in that thread that celestian pointed to. For general images that the DM might want to view and share change the side so that the maximum height is 800 or max width is 1000.

OK, so the thing I should look for is amount of "raw pixels", not the image dimensions. So a 800x1000 pic will be good for general use.

I just recall reading that the image should fully fit in "default" FG screen size. I've never used that default so in past for my own modules, the images were bigger in screen real estate. if 800x1000 is a good un' for distribution, will resize to that.


Zach, what about those really skinny ones like the monster pics in. Volo's? Since cannot look at orig cos images are all vaulty, wonder rough guesstimate of that pix size (vs. me trying resize after resize until approximate heheh)


Celestian, I read the discussion on file sizes etc. Was wondering on "real estate size" i.e., space it uses on screen, I guess?

[LordEntrails]

Here's some info;
dpi = dots per inch. This comes from dot matrix printers, and really only has to do with resolution of printed things.
ppi = pixels per inch and this has to do with how good a screen is in showing fine details. This matters when you take into account distance from screen and screen size, but doesn't tell you how much screen space you have to work with.
inches mean nothing on a computer screen. With digital images this will do you virtually no good unless you know dpi as well.
real estate is an imprecise term, generally meaning how much of the available screen size one is referring to or using. This is really all about number of pixels (since that the only thing your screen really cares about).

pixel size is what matters in FG.

Your screen size is 2560 x 1440 pixels. Which is on the high side for most users. For products (images) that you want to share with others, assume their screens are as low as 1280x720 or 1280x1024 (depending upon their screen aspect ratio). This is why the suggestion for most images is 1000 x 800 max, it will fit without resizing for most everyone.

[Talyn]

DPI is for dead trees, ignore that.

What I've been doing like for the cover art (or any other full-page art that I'll be using in the reference manual) is to fit it within the default reference manual width which from trial and error seems to be approximately 535 pixels. So I just resize that image to 535 and whatever the height ends up, cool. I typically just use that image to link in the Images sidebar window too instead of either including two images (one with original resolution) or only having the full-size then telling FG to use the smaller resolution in the reference manual since filesize matters for sharing as well.

For battle maps, the recommendation is to first get the filesize under 1MB. Use .jpg, lower the quality anywhere from 70% to 50% whatever looks the best without sacrificing too much fidelity. Then try to keep the resolution 2048x2048 or smaller for RAM purposes. You can do one or a couple bigger than that but try to keep them to a minimum.

[Varsuuk]

cool, I was using "real estate" to try to indicate I was looking for an x by y pixel count that would be best to fit most UIs. Thanks.

I will use 1000x800 as recommended for Images. I had thought I read someone say should size so it fully fits in default size of FG's window... which is damn small ;) I always resized it even when had my much smaller 21" Ultrasharp from 2007.


Talvy: Thanks, Reference manual was goi g to follow after linked all the images/maps/encounters. So, thanks for the H x 535 recommendation. I haven't started with Reference manuals yet. I'll ask about that when get there. I imagined if I included images I used in the "normal" story entries that it would use same image but "shrunk" by FG automagically to a size I specified when creating the ref image link.

Thanks all as usual!

[Trenloe]

I will use 1000x800 as recommended for Images.
What this means is that portrait format images should be a maximum of 800 tall (the width will be less) and landscape format images should be a maximum of 1000 pixels wide (the height will be less, unless the image is close to square). For close to square images use 800 tall as a maximum.

[Zacchaeus]

Yes, just to be absolutely clear we are not saying make all your images 800x1000. What we are saying is make sure that the maximum height of the image is 800 and the maximum width is 1000. So anything within those limits is fine. If your image is less than those dimensions don't try to change it up; just leave it as it is (such as in the case with the skinny images you mention - they're likely 800 high but might only be 250 wide)

[Varsuuk]

Yes, just to be absolutely clear we are not saying make all your images 800x1000. What we are saying is make sure that the maximum height of the image is 800 and the maximum width is 1000. So anything within those limits is fine. If your image is less than those dimensions don't try to change it up; just leave it as it is (such as in the case with the skinny images you mention - they're likely 800 high but might only be 250 wide)

Thanks, I got that. The images I started on resizing were full page (cover and another art one) ones which were also well more than 800h x 1000w sized.

If I find any of the ones I open are less, I would never make them bigger (well, unless I was converting C&C with its sad-mini-sized dungeon maps :p

[Varsuuk]

18200
18201 ---> Trenloe, sorry misunderstood, noticed what you meant - it should be no taller than 800, no wider than 1000. Leaving the image since referenced it and someone may be typing a response ;)
(sorry editing on ipad hard to move the attach to better spot vi finger cut/paste)


Just to recap, I left the FG screen at default size created.

Attached is a SS of my graphic (extracted from my personal PDF with watermark layered over) at 1000x773, it is still taller than default FG screen. I'm assuming that's acceptable.

I received a Cover png from Tim and it was sized at 796x616, so tried that directly. Still bigger heh. I figure I'll use the one he sent me (converting to jpeg first) since I got that one direct from source.


So yeah, that's what confused me - thought was doing wring because when I scaled, it was still bigger.


As an aside, on my mac I used gimp vs PS on desktop (I don't know either program heh :( ). To resize it there, I modified th height or width and let the other be set automatically. I didn't go near x or y resolution. Should I modify the "Quality" Interpolation selection? it was default Cubic, there is linear, none and sinc(lanczros3) options?

If yes, is the answer different if I am going from smaller pixel count up vs larger pixel count to smaller? I ask because for some maps, I include at orig size for DM and enlarged for player map since in orig it was small.

[Trenloe]

Attached is a SS of my graphic (extracted from my personal PDF with watermark layered over) at 1000x773, it is still taller than default FG screen. I'm assuming that's acceptable.
Yes, that's acceptable - as it is within the guidelines we've been giving in this thread. These are the guidelines that the FG developers have been receiving (via the FG developer newsletter a few issues ago).

[Talyn]

What screen resolution are you working with @Varsuuk? I realize you're on your Macbook which has "issues" apparently, not sure what your deskop OS and resolution is...

My display is 1080p (1920x1080) and according to the Steam Hardware Survey (https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey) that resolution is still the largest segment of the Steam gamer population. Who knows how much correlation there is between gamers and virtual tabletoppers but still, 1080p has been the accepted standard for several years and it's the assumption I attempt to size my large images for (battle maps notwithstanding) as well. I generally try not to force users to resize windows where possible, because I don't like having other developers do that to me. But if someone's using an older, smaller resolution, there's only so much I can do.

[Varsuuk]

Yes, that's acceptable - as it is within the guidelines we've been giving in this thread. These are the guidelines that the FG developers have been receiving (via the FG developer newsletter a few issues ago).

Great, thank you :). This would be my first effort at a "serious" module vs one for just myself. Again and as always thanks for your efforts and forebearance of my rambling writing style.

[Varsuuk]

Hah, that's what I get for trying to do some FG work between long performance tests at work. Yeah, I kept thinking each time I typed that as was working on my desktop res (25##x1440) but right now in the macbook, it's only 1680x1050.

Yeah, I think it's a good bet that if you need to go bigger, stop around 1920 or 1680 as the imagined "container.". When I made my own, I just created according to my specs.


Btw T(either really), about that interpolation option when using scale on gimp... thoughts tips? Since I knew nothing, I was leaving as is (see my uploaded images). I figure if ever upscale it may matter more?


What screen resolution are you working with @Varsuuk? I realize you're on your Macbook which has "issues" apparently, not sure what your deskop OS and resolution is...

My display is 1080p (1920x1080) and according to the Steam Hardware Survey (https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey) that resolution is still the largest segment of the Steam gamer population. Who knows how much correlation there is between gamers and virtual tabletoppers but still, 1080p has been the accepted standard for several years and it's the assumption I attempt to size my large images for (battle maps notwithstanding) as well. I generally try not to force users to resize windows where possible, because I don't like having other developers do that to me. But if someone's using an older, smaller resolution, there's only so much I can do.

[Talyn]

Btw T(either really), about that interpolation option when using scale on gimp... thoughts tips? Since I knew nothing, I was leaving as is (see my uploaded images). I figure if ever upscale it may matter more?

There's the GIMP Docs page on Scaling (https://docs.gimp.org/en/gimp-image-scale.html) that has a brief description of each. A Google search led me to a conversation about it and the breakdown was:


None (nearest-neighbor): Use when you want absolutely no sampling (blurring) of the image.

Linear: Use when you have very small text; cubic interpolation is usually better otherwise. This produces blurred, but jagged, edges.

Cubic: Use for most images. Unless the image is very small or incredibly detailed, cubic and bicubic interpolation helps keep edges smooth. According to Wikipedia, it can sometimes increase perceived contrast or cause artifacts.

Lanczos: This interpolation method is much like cubic except that instead of blurring, it creates a "ringing" pattern. The benefit is that it can handle detailed graphics without blurring like the cubic filters.


My GIMP is set to Cubic, though for some reason I thought it had been set to Lanczos all along. Or maybe Irfanview is set to Lanczos...? It sounds like different types of images may produce artifacting or blurring when rescaled so one idea would be try each one and save under its own filename them compare them?

As for changing the quality setting for .jpg images, when you do the Export as JPEG there's a quality slider at the top of the dialog as such:

https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=18203&stc=1&d=1489180546

[Andraax]

Also, under Advanced Options, set the subsampling to "Chroma Quartered".

[Varsuuk]

Brain...hurts... ;)

That's why asked vs researched. I'm in the middle of re-learning Swift to do some ios10 work. Started doing modules and reading about rulesets (just read through a pair of Lua texts), physical therapy, prepping for a future campaign including learning enough Inkscape/Illustrator PS/Gimp to muck with some paizo GH maps I got as well as next trying to find out if can merge them while in non-flattened mode AND this week going to start learning how to use vTune for my gateway at work...

Did I mention, I have to build a lot of Lego this weekend? No? Well ... I DO :)




So, this sampling/interpie thing is for both upsizing and downsizing right?