View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Topic : "Resolution?�" |
Snakebyte member
Member # Joined: 04 Feb 2000 Posts: 360 Location: GA
|
Posted: Sun Feb 20, 2000 2:35 pm |
|
![](templates/drizz/images/hrline.gif) |
I�m sure this has been asked before and I just didn�t catch it.
What resolution do you (anyone) make your canvas when drawing, and how well does it run on you system?
I could not help to notice that Danny�s �Lara my love� pic was created @ 10000x7140 witch would kill my computer.
|
|
Back to top |
|
derPunkt member
Member # Joined: 12 Jan 2000 Posts: 141 Location: Bjelovar, Croatia
|
Posted: Sun Feb 20, 2000 2:39 pm |
|
![](templates/drizz/images/hrline.gif) |
Danny did that for a poster for his boss.
But at Eidos he had killer machines, so it wasn't the hardware problem (but I can't imagine the trouble he went thru)
I start with the target rezolutions (I never work in higher and then resize) and most of my pictures are in screen format (640x480, 800x600 etc)
|
|
Back to top |
|
Snakebyte member
Member # Joined: 04 Feb 2000 Posts: 360 Location: GA
|
Posted: Sun Feb 20, 2000 8:54 pm |
|
![](templates/drizz/images/hrline.gif) |
Man, I can�t imagine working with images so small (640x480 8x6)
I can�t seem to stop making them too big, don�t know why, I just can�t seem to get the detail I want in a small pic.
Personally anything under 2500x2500 is just too small and any thing above is too much for the computer once I get 60 to 70 layers involved. (Yea, I�m a layer freak )
|
|
Back to top |
|
Pigeon member
Member # Joined: 28 Jan 2000 Posts: 249 Location: Chicago
|
Posted: Sun Feb 20, 2000 11:38 pm |
|
![](templates/drizz/images/hrline.gif) |
Lately I work around 1500 to 2000, but if I need to do some detail work, I'll blow up the small section to 2000 or so, and then scale it back down into the original image size. |
|
Back to top |
|
Joachim member
Member # Joined: 18 Jan 2000 Posts: 1332 Location: Norway
|
Posted: Sun Feb 20, 2000 11:59 pm |
|
![](templates/drizz/images/hrline.gif) |
I have worked with a big variaty of rezolutions, and find working in low rezolution totally unnescessary. Not that it demands more of an artist, but the lower rezolution you work in, the more you start focusing on how each pixel are placed, instead of the totality of the image. Also, the bigger you make it, the more you can actually use the picture to something else than for webpages (like prints)
So, try working with as high rez. you can feel comfortable with (like Craig Mullins said, let the machine do the math)
That's atleast my point of view.
------------------
DonBarrum ;)
web: http://home.sol.no/~jbarrum/ |
|
Back to top |
|
assa member
Member # Joined: 02 Feb 2000 Posts: 96 Location: Amsterdam Holland
|
Posted: Mon Feb 21, 2000 2:58 am |
|
![](templates/drizz/images/hrline.gif) |
Der punkt :
Well, the 'danny vs lara' picture was done +-
2 years ago, and like danny stated in his
txt, he did the picture on a 'lousy' pentium
pro 200. This means NO killer machine at all.
He showed me the picture a year ago (the big
version) on a friend's pc and it took more
then 10 minutes to load, hehe..
So only hard works and true dedication makes
it possible! No pain, no gain.
assa - prof. digital artist/designer |
|
Back to top |
|
dennison member
Member # Joined: 29 Jan 2000 Posts: 247
|
Posted: Mon Feb 21, 2000 8:35 am |
|
![](templates/drizz/images/hrline.gif) |
wow 10 mins eh :P
snake i usually use 5"x5" at 300dpi. |
|
Back to top |
|
|