How do I make jpegs to this spec ??

Discussion in 'Photoshop' started by Stephen Hammond, May 12, 2007.

  1. How do I make jpegs to this spec ??

    Here is the requirement pics with these specs: 170dpi with the longest
    length of the pic at 30cm; saved as a no. 5 jpeg (the compressed file size
    should be between
    500 and 800k).

    I have photoshop :confused:
     
    Stephen Hammond, May 12, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Stephen Hammond

    Joel Guest

    Why do you have to give some specific requirement to confuse yourself?
    Yes, I believe Photoshop has the option but I ain't gonna give it to you
    until I know exactly what you are trying to do, or I don't want to give you
    a rope to hang yourself.

    Or I think I smell something may have to do with printing, but the whole
    message doesn't make any sense.
     
    Joel, May 12, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. .... or some one else made the spec and he's trying to fit?
    To the OP, Knot to worry ...

    Image size, set dpi first, then set longest dimenstion then OK, then SAVE
    AS: to jpg with '5' as quality. In the future, you should acquaint yourself
    with F1 and the topic of the manipulation.
     
    Sir F. A. Rien, May 12, 2007
    #3
  4. Stephen Hammond

    Roy G Guest

    Hi.

    It is a weird specification. Resolution required is in Dots per Inch, yet
    physical size is in Centimetres.

    It would have been more sensible to have specified the image size in Inches.

    It would have been really sensible to have required a specific number of
    pixels on the long side, with the image at 170Ppi.

    Roy G
     
    Roy G, May 12, 2007
    #4
  5. Stephen Hammond

    Joel Guest

    I know, the requirement is so weird and incomplete. It just don't make
    any sense.
     
    Joel, May 12, 2007
    #5
  6. Dunno ... I could make on that fit!

    What difference is there between specifying pixels, inches or cm to a
    specific dpi/ppi.? Seems their print process likes a certain dpi/ppi, and
    they want a certain physical resultant size.

    xx CM = yy IN = zzz pixels when dpi/ppi is specified. Simple math, eh?

    NB'er to me!
     
    Sir F. A. Rien, May 12, 2007
    #6
  7. Stephen Hammond

    Joel Guest

    It fits your emptied skull alright <bg>
     
    Joel, May 12, 2007
    #7
  8. That's not weird at all. In the metric world, it is normal to specify
    length in centimeters. However, 'pixels per centimeter' or 'dots per
    centimeter' are hardly ever used, not even in the metric world. So to
    give the size in centimeters and the resolution in ppi (or dpi) is done
    every day in my part of the world.
    Now *that* would be weird. If you give the length in pixels, the
    resolution is no longer relevant.

    To answer the question: It's pretty simple. Go to 'Image Size' and check
    the 'Resample Image' checkbox. Then first enter 170 ppi as resolution,
    and then 30 as length in centimeters. Hit 'OK' and save as JPEG with
    quality 5. That's all there is to it.
     
    Johan W. Elzenga, May 12, 2007
    #8
  9. Oh goodie, can't comprehend any variation outside personal thinking, then
    has to turn personal.

    BTW, "it just doesn't" ... !
     
    Sir F. A. Rien, May 13, 2007
    #9
  10. Stephen Hammond

    Joel Guest

    Of course it doesn't, can you get it? Because just like the printing
    style

    - Something has value

    - Emptied skull has no value

    Combining them together it says "you can't fit something into nothing".
    That's why I don't have any interest in chatting with you <bg>
     
    Joel, May 13, 2007
    #10
  11. Then why do you reply, and repeat your lack of comprehension?

    FWIW, the above comment of mine was in reference to YOUR poor grammar!

    TAFFLOASP.
     
    Sir F. A. Rien, May 14, 2007
    #11
  12. Stephen Hammond

    Joel Guest

    I'm smashing your emptied skull hoping to make some hole to fill it with
    Thanks, but that's my problem, you need to get some brain to work on yours
    It's plain stupid!
     
    Joel, May 14, 2007
    #12
  13. Stephen Hammond

    Dave Guest


    it is plain stupid making yourself unpopular in a newsgroup filled
    with treasures of information. We can do without your kind of
    language. And it is easy to make use of USENET's anonymity,
    but your problems will start when the people with the knowledge
    simply ignore your questions. Then you will know why.

    Dave
     
    Dave, May 14, 2007
    #13
  14. Stephen Hammond

    KatWoman Guest

    I'm smashing your emptied skull hoping to make some hole to fill it with
    Thanks, but that's my problem, you need to get some brain to work on yours
    It's plain stupid!

    Is Joel the same guy as Joe??
     
    KatWoman, May 14, 2007
    #14
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.