ArtRage 5 Product PageArtRage Lite Product PageArtRage for iPad Product PageArtRage for Android Product PageArtRage  Android Oil Painter Free Product PageArtRage  Free Demos Page

Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: I need some help with artRage DPI settings for printing.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    5

    Question I need some help with artRage DPI settings for printing.

    Hello all. I am new to this forum, and owner of ArtRage Studio pro. I did a search for this query but I am still confused . I understand DPI and pixlel widths, as I am in art college and work with CS4 design suite near daily, and all but I don't understand why my laptop is lagging at 300 dpi.

    My laptop I am working on has to following stats:
    Windows XP Pro sp3
    Intel2Quad Q9000
    3.0 (4 gigs actual) ram
    Nvida GTXM 260 with 2gigs dedicated ram.


    If I understand correctly, from my search, Artrage processes strokes and things various ways. Also it is only a single core processor. I think this is the source of my woes; however I am unsure.

    To get to the point of all this, I want to have a very HQ print from my artwork in artrage. I also want to avoid lag in my strokes, as I found out two days ago artrage does not like 11 x 17 at 300 dpi with 10 layers.

    I also, know DPI matters a lot in printing, as you can get bitmaping/jaggies/stairstepping in image files at 72 dpi. So is the DPI as important in artrage as in Photoshop or is it some conversion I have to do on my part (ala points to inches) to have a high quality export tiff/png?

    Thank you all for your time for helping me in this endeavor.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    5
    Okay sorry for the double post but I think this deserved it own thing.

    Was messing with Art rage for a bit, with the info I already gleamed and I think I have a solution to my problem. If I select screen size option at 72dpi I can have a massive image exported.

    What I found is as follows
    Page size 11in X 17in converted to screen size 3300x5100 px, at
    the initial setup of a document will yeald a 44.00 in x 68.00 in image.
    Due to it's size, scaling up to 300 dpi in an exported tiff or png, to PS
    will be lossless to the eye and will print out fine and have only small
    lag, on the first-third stroke of a tool.

    I am pretty sure this is what all those other posts were talking about, when I searched, but I didn't understand . Well if I am wrong, then please someone correct me.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    3438 ft above sea level
    Posts
    2,951
    For this conversion you are using the formula
    Convert inches to Pixels
    Formula: Inches X DPI = Pixels
    Quote Originally Posted by The-Path View Post
    What I found is as follows
    Page size 11in X 17in converted to screen size 3300x5100 px
    This is correct

    However when you convert back to a 300dpi file for print you will use this formula
    Convert pixels to inches
    Formula: Pixels DPI = Inches
    Which will yield you your original width and height once more (11in X 17in) not the 44.00 in x 68.00in you've arrived at.

    Whether you work with an actual width and height at 300dpi or convert the file using the top formula, the file size in memory remains the same and therefore there should be no noticeable performance difference on your machine.

    Working with large print size files will cause slowdown with a 32bit app that is single threaded, it is simply the limitations of the hardware and software.

    To help performance:-
    Make sure you have a lot of swap disk (virtual memory) available

    Keeping your layers to a minimum will help performance as each new layer you add will increase the overall file size. The file size on disk is a compressed file, when opened up in an application it is a much larger file that you are working with. This is because Artrage has to calculate lighting, texture etc. Merging layers as you go is a good strategy for working with large print files.

    If you have 4gig of RAM or less you may get some performance improvement by disabling as many memory resident applications as you can while you work.

    At the end of the day you need to understand that print resolution raster files tend to bring any machine to its knees in 32bit, single threaded applications.
    Last edited by Juz; 04-17-2010 at 01:33 PM.
    "I paint because I love to cut mats" (Arthur Alexander)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    5
    Okay so it was all the lighting that does that. Okay...got it. I have about 156 gigs of space to draw from, going to clean up my hard drive today actually.

    However, I like keeping it that big, as I take the file to Photo shop to add finishing stuff on it. I am so used to being required to have a 300dpi image that I just reduce it when I am done, by printing it 11X17. That way all my lines and such will be very tight looking.

    Thank you for the reply Juz. Hopefully the rest of my cores can be utilized with an update.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    3438 ft above sea level
    Posts
    2,951
    Agree totally... 64bit version would be sweet too

    The best thing you can do to help yourself out is keep your layers to a minimum. For the image you have 17x11in @ 300dpi... one layer with paint on it will be around 5 to 10 meg on disk (compressed). With five layers of paint the file will be around 40 to 45 meg on disk. So layers really ramp up the file size your working with quickly and when loaded and expanded into memory while working in an app they can quickly grind your machine to a standstill.
    "I paint because I love to cut mats" (Arthur Alexander)

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    238
    1, Computer screen has 72dpi. Normal printer has 300dpi.
    2, Now decide which printing way you want: keep the detail or keep the size.
    3, If you want to keep all the details without getting pixelated, your printed work will be about 4 times (300/72) smaller than what you would see 100% on screen. If you decide to keep the size, then every 'dot' you have on paper will be about 4 times bigger than an actual pixel on screen.

    The other way works as well. A fix-sized picture with more dpi will have more pixels. As Juz said,
    Formula: Inches * DPI = Pixels, where you assume dot=pixel.

    However I think if you stretch the image 2 or 3 times before printing, the printed work will still look great. It means you can work your digital file 2 or 3 times smaller...
    ------------------------------

    Laggy program?

    As I said in other thread, my computer has 4G ram and 2.3GHz CPU, win7 and everything. It will lag when I paint any pictures larger than A4 in 300 dpi (2480*3508px). It will also lag when I work on screen size 1600*900px with multiple layers (sometimes would even crash).

    So I think your case is quite normal. If you want to 'mute' lighting and thickness, just press F5 key on your keyboard. If you are a 'thickness lover' like me, just work small on one layer.


  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    5
    thanks all for the kind answers to my questions.

  8. #8
    http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/a..._distance.html

    Going to interject this, because 300ppi is not the "magic number" for resolution. Resolution should be dependent on viewing distance. Something like a painting, which is meant to be viewed from a few feet off can get by with a much lower ppi, say 115ppi (and take a lot of load off your machine.) Have a look at the full article for a more complete explanation.

  9. #9
    Excellent link. Bookmarked.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •