Loading...
> >

Daz render to quality poster question

andrewburgonandrewburgon Posts: 16
in Technical Help (nuts n bolts)

Hi guys,

I want to create posters for the print-on-demand market. Can anyone please confirm that the following steps are correct? 

Render the image in Daz. Small poster size on cafe press 20x16 inches. I times that by 300 and render at 6000x4800. I then 'scaled' it in Gimp to 300 pixels per inch. While pixels per inch and dpi seem to be different this is the advice I kept on reading on the internet. Microsoft's photo viewer confirms that my test image changed to 300dpi. I haven't changed the resolution at all. So now I assume I just upload it as a poster on my cafe press shop. How did I do? Have I got the theory right?

### Another important question. If you have experience creating posters and uploading them to cafe press, what type of file are you uploading and what is the file size. If it's jpg, how much compression are you using? The image guidelines on the site say they strongly suggest jpg for anything over 10mb. 

I appreciate any helpful advice you give on this matter.

Comments

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 99,316

    So the pixel count is not chnaging? The  yes, that is correct.

  • PerttiAPerttiA Posts: 10,013

    I find their comment about JPG surprising, as JPG is a lossy compression algorithm = it looses detail when processed. PNG would be better in that respect (lossless)

  • PaintboxPaintbox Posts: 1,633

    PerttiA said:

    I find their comment about JPG surprising, as JPG is a lossy compression algorithm = it looses detail when processed. PNG would be better in that respect (lossless)

    JPG on 100% is pretty good though, it won't lose much if it all and we use it professionaly here all the time (if space is an issue)

  • robertswwwrobertswww Posts: 790

    @andrewburgon Your rendered images from Daz Studio will be in RGB color space. Check with Cafe Press to see if they want CMYK color space, as that is what is normally used for printing.

    300 DPI/ppi is fine. I would use an uncompressed format such as TIFF format (.tif) if your image is under 10 MB, or PNG. If it's over 10 MB, then you will probably need to use JPEG to compress it.

  • andrewburgonandrewburgon Posts: 16

    Richard Haseltine said:

    So the pixel count is not chnaging? The  yes, that is correct.

    Thanks for the confirmation.

  • andrewburgonandrewburgon Posts: 16

    Thanks, everyone, for your input.

  • AgitatedRiotAgitatedRiot Posts: 4,404

    PerttiA said:

    I find their comment about JPG surprising, as JPG is a lossy compression algorithm = it looses detail when processed. PNG would be better in that respect (lossless)

    I wondered that also. Then after some research, I found using JPEG scales well. PNGs are different scaling degrades the image once you change the dimensions. If you render an excellent 2' x 4' poster or 7200 pixels by 10800 pixels I render a lot of those in DAZ(DAZ Can Handle them). Then buy cheap frames and put them in. It's around 25 dollars for a poster frame, Almost the same to have it printed out. Out 50 or so dollars. Then I take them to the local pot shops and sell them for 100. You be amazed at what druggies buy. This is why I upgrade so often or it's just my addiction.devil

  • AgitatedRiotAgitatedRiot Posts: 4,404

    PerttiA said:

    I find their comment about JPG surprising, as JPG is a lossy compression algorithm = it looses detail when processed. PNG would be better in that respect (lossless)

    I wondered that also. Then after some research, I found using JPEG scales well. PNGs are different scaling degrades the image once you change the dimensions. If you render an excellent 2' x 4' poster or 7200 pixels by 10800 pixels I render a lot of those in DAZ(DAZ Can Handle them). Then buy cheap frames and put them in. It's around 25 dollars for a poster frame, Almost the same to have it printed out. Out 50 or so dollars. Then I take them to the local pot shops and sell them for 100. You be amazed at what druggies buy. This is why I upgrade so often or it's just my addiction.devil

  • AgitatedRiotAgitatedRiot Posts: 4,404
    edited September 2022

    Already planning my next system. Looking at dual processors and 256GBs motherboards. Still have to put that off have to replace my lawn tractor looking at around 4000 US there. Was looking at electric riders but I wonder if they can drag my old fat butt around my huge yard.

    Post edited by AgitatedRiot on
  • felisfelis Posts: 4,191

    AgitatedRiot said:

    PerttiA said:

    I find their comment about JPG surprising, as JPG is a lossy compression algorithm = it looses detail when processed. PNG would be better in that respect (lossless)

    I wondered that also. Then after some research, I found using JPEG scales well. PNGs are different scaling degrades the image once you change the dimensions. If you render an excellent 2' x 4' poster or 7200 pixels by 10800 pixels I render a lot of those in DAZ(DAZ Can Handle them). Then buy cheap frames and put them in. It's around 25 dollars for a poster frame, Almost the same to have it printed out. Out 50 or so dollars. Then I take them to the local pot shops and sell them for 100. You be amazed at what druggies buy. This is why I upgrade so often or it's just my addiction.devil

    I can't see that the image format can do a difference in scaling.

    It must purely be the appliication used for scaling. When an image is loaded into an image editor, the origimal format doesn't matter, as it is just pixels with values.

    And that is why AI scaling has become a trend. 

  • AgitatedRiotAgitatedRiot Posts: 4,404

    That could be. So far, everything I have read says the same thing. On the other hand, scaling down may not be the problem; it may lie with enlarging an image. I'm not quite sure. 

Sign In or Register to comment.