From: "Rick Gerard" Received: from bosmailout08.eigbox.net ([66.96.189.8] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.1.0) with ESMTPS id 6349879 for ae-list@media-motion.tv; Fri, 03 Nov 2017 16:15:27 +0100 Received: from bosmailscan09.eigbox.net ([10.20.15.9]) by bosmailout08.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1eAdjd-0001vs-MM for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Fri, 03 Nov 2017 11:18:17 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mstrg.com; s=dkim; h=Sender:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:To:References:Date:Subject: Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=o+vrx0zJlCl5bVa3NMZ6zWkKnES2WsndxeFWsYU5lic=; b=gR9jFDafEuV2FSethFPELDdGnv rMHH2gW861iq12PXhA3HZKLpMmDRQajRNY3XeesYpDCvAJBjJ94ELHXZo/T8yqa9e+g93jEQfeak7 uoBLy35eEj9MRcaBXesYcjLQUiZLgsJq/F7RHb0pXKHWhW8n3TIbpq7N4lWjGta9LJudjwg7FeDz5 +6R5q0Uxmd/jNGz3HIioB/ALDHuApSvw9SDG+7M69rFNUEPyhixluazZnVURfLtGG3IawNGHUiG4q SDTCj4CiIFQhqJUIChjR7SwjDHY/NeI2Pw/OVpL0ICRpwnfxMa9aPAV/lmaqfm1oYLTSSRQ+N0KDO VUI7Pw6g==; Received: from [10.115.3.31] (helo=bosimpout11) by bosmailscan09.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1eAdjd-0006Pn-Jo for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Fri, 03 Nov 2017 11:18:17 -0400 Received: from bosauthsmtp14.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.20.18.14]) by bosimpout11 with id VTJE1w00F0JCtq201TJHSN; Fri, 03 Nov 2017 11:18:17 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=RdbgMxlv c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=AnsiuLKgxXFeB68GILQVjQ==:117 a=HgOLPoJXiPfkJLRCmnDYtw==:17 a=sC3jslCIGhcA:10 a=zi5x8akGzQMA:10 a=Q8Or4T28W9SLKAk96JAA:9 a=9z6w7c-1NrPkduEz:21 a=IkhxoLAYIqtTgKAy:21 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=FjNbUDR7mv_5xEtT:21 a=MVwZu0IZ-0Ly0ieR:21 a=wdDL2IIlDT54qLoD:21 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 Received: from 068.201-93-216-nokia-dsl.dynamic.surewest.net ([216.93.201.68]:61251 helo=[192.168.1.12]) by bosauthsmtp14.eigbox.net with esmtpa (Exim) id 1eAdja-0007cW-6l for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Fri, 03 Nov 2017 11:18:14 -0400 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_040DF2B8-6A17-4602-B799-6DD80B39914C" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.0 \(3445.1.7\)) Subject: Re: [AE] Resolution Mystery Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2017 08:18:11 -0700 References: To: After Effects Mail List In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <3A19D762-9E16-4941-A222-407A8587C6BD@mstrg.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.1.7) X-EN-UserInfo: c662172581359b31880c5d4c8e0aae06:931c98230c6409dcc37fa7e93b490c27 X-EN-AuthUser: rg@hottek.net Sender: Rick Gerard X-EN-OrigIP: 216.93.201.68 X-EN-OrigHost: 068.201-93-216-nokia-dsl.dynamic.surewest.net --Apple-Mail=_040DF2B8-6A17-4602-B799-6DD80B39914C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 No - you can=E2=80=99t blow up a 300 ppi image 4 times without loosing = quality in video or the web.=20 The samples I showed you are exactly the same number of pixels. The PPI = only effects the size of the printed image on paper. They will both look = exactly the same on the web, embedded in an email, or in a video.=20 PPI is completely irrelevant unless you are printing. That is what = controls the size of the printed image.=20 If you are scanning a document then increasing the PPI will give you = more pixels per inch of document, but if the image originally is 100 = pixels by 100 pixels then the resolution is 10,000 pixels. PPI has = nothing at all to do with resolution in a digital image.=20 PPI has everything to do with resolution when you are talking about = scanning or the size of an image sensor. When you are talking about a = digital display you don=E2=80=99t use PPI, you use dot pitch - how many = dots are there per inch. I hope this helps. When working with images in Photoshop or even = creating vector artwork in Illustrator you should only be looking at the = number of pixels. The only time you need to pay attention to PPI is when = you intend to print that image on paper. Hope this clears it up for you. > On Nov 3, 2017, at 8:02 AM, Peter Matulavich = wrote: >=20 > Thanks Rick, it worked and how easy! While you don't need to worry = about PPI in the settings, it's good to know how many PPI were in the = original image so you know how much you can blow it up before losing = quality, right? In other words, a 300 ppi image can be blown up a = little more than 4 times. I don't often work with imagery that was = originally 300 ppi, so this really opens some doors when I do. >=20 > Thanks again. >=20 > Pete >=20 > = --------------------------------------------------------------------------= --------------------------------------------------- >=20 > If you goal is to resize the images so they are at least 1920 X 1080 = then do that by resampling the image Alt/Option + Ctrl/Cmnd + i, then = turn resample on and set the dimensions to pixels and enter 1920 or 1080 = in the smallest box. You don=E2=80=99t need to worry about the PPI = unless you plan to print the image. --Apple-Mail=_040DF2B8-6A17-4602-B799-6DD80B39914C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 No = - you can=E2=80=99t blow up a 300 ppi image 4 times without loosing = quality in video or the web. 

The samples I showed you are exactly = the same number of pixels. The PPI only effects the size of the printed = image on paper. They will both look exactly the same on the web, = embedded in an email, or in a video. 

PPI is completely irrelevant unless you = are printing. That is what controls the size of the printed = image. 

If = you are scanning a document then increasing the PPI will give you more = pixels per inch of document, but if the image originally is 100 pixels = by 100 pixels then the resolution is 10,000 pixels. PPI has nothing at = all to do with resolution in a digital image. 

PPI has everything to do = with resolution when you are talking about scanning or the size of an = image sensor. When you are talking about a digital display you don=E2=80=99= t use PPI, you use dot pitch - how many dots are there per = inch.

I hope = this helps. When working with images in Photoshop or even creating = vector artwork in Illustrator you should only be looking at the number = of pixels. The only time you need to pay attention to PPI is when you = intend to print that image on paper.

Hope this clears it up for you.

On Nov 3, 2017, at 8:02 AM, Peter Matulavich <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:

Thanks Rick,  it worked and how easy! =  While you don't need to worry about PPI in the settings, it's good = to know how many PPI were in the original image so you know how much you = can blow it up before losing quality, right?  In other words, a = 300 ppi image can be blown up a little more than 4 times.  I = don't often work with imagery that was originally = 300 ppi, so this really = opens some doors when I do.

Thanks = again.

Pete

---------------------------------------------------------------= --------------------------------------------------------------

If you goal is to = resize the images so they are at least 1920 X 1080 then do that by = resampling the image Alt/Option + Ctrl/Cmnd + i, then turn resample on = and set the dimensions to pixels and enter 1920 or 1080 in the smallest = box. You don=E2=80=99t need to worry about the PPI unless you plan to = print the image.

= --Apple-Mail=_040DF2B8-6A17-4602-B799-6DD80B39914C--