How to explain that?
- Started
- Last post
- 18 Responses
- ribit0
At General Motors we projected design proposals on a 6 meter wide screen. We would project the 1024x768 image from the crappy PC we were using... looked fine... The projector quality (and ambient light, screen surface) is often the limiting factor here, not your source image resolution.
- matt250
its cool to do big stuff at small resolutions - it is usually seen from a distance so looks good
like billboards are done really low like 72 or something
- 4cY0
is this all true?
i always asked the client how big the wall is they project on..
lol
j/k
I did once make some ads on colourslides for a big cinema, and i was amazed at how great the result looked on a GIANT screen whilst using such a fairly low resolution..
- matt250
is it just me or is everyone sick of having to deal with shit like this. people hire us for our "expertise" then don't trust us - ahahhhhhhhhhhhhh
- matt250
is it just me or is everyone sick of having to deal with shit like this. people hire us for our "expertise" then don't trust us - ahahhhhhhhhhhhhh
- ribit0
AAARGH!
None of this has anything to do with DPI.
We are talking about percieved image quality of a digital image presented to the viewer at a certain distance.
All that counts here is how many pixels in the image (x by y dimensions), and how large the image is in the viewers field of view ( the image projected on the wall may well be smaller to the viewer than a laptop screen 12 inches from their eyes).
so......... If your image is 1024x768 or something like that...it's fine.
- MrDinky0
well than.. tell them that you know better cause you are THE expert in the field...
and tell them to not to mess with you... or else..
- Bertrand0
No money involved, it's for an internal department (otherwise I would have done a PC version, a 3-5 people meeting room version and a conference room version!)
- MrDinky0
yeah well i tried that line and they got pissed off...
hehe
i would just make two one for print and other for screen.. make them happy...
get more money...
- Bertrand0
Thanks for your help.
I will give some of the examples listed above and conclude by a "it's not really a problem if you don't understand why and how. After all making things work on screens is what I am paid for".
- MrDinky0
just show them same image in 300 and 72..
but mind you when you print 72 it will look shitty and they might complain about that...
if they dont know the dif between 300 and 72, they will complain about everything..
- Nirvous0
It all has to do with WormHole technology and you dont have time to explain it right now.
- onehugeeye0
Explain them that the monitor of their computer has far better resolution than any video projector or any TV. And that analog images (TV) are represented in lines, not dots (PC)
- stewart0
just show them the beamer-resolution in the manual.
- Bluejam0
Prove 'em wrong.
Bet them $100 that there is no difference, go through motions and do what they ask...
...they'll be $100 lighter in pocket and you'll have one wicked hangover come saturday morning.
- slinky0
rather explain to them that PowerPoint is pure evil.
otherwise... i think just tell them what you posted... i am convinced.
- kodap0
just say what you said now.
no need for more explanations.300dpi is for print. 72 for screen.
- unknown0
ask them if they think FHM created a fifteen million dpi image when they projected those tits on the houses of parliament.
not the best example but I think it'll pass on your frustrated message.
- Bertrand
How can I explain to someone that a image in 72dpi on a powepoint presentation will be the same quality on a monitor screen and on a meeting room wall with a projector and that there is no need to create a 300dpi version for the meeting room?
Thanks for your help, that's driving me mad!