Loss of quality of image exports

kevbeck43 · May 2018

Last night I exported a map at 6000x4000 with like 5000 pixels per inch and the symbols still came out pixelated. I can use the map but there was a time where I could export a map at a resolution like this and those same symbols would be crystal clear. If this is not possible now is there something in gimp I can do with the PNG to get the symbols less pixelated? I would put down an image but its to big. I will try to put up a screen shot later but if someone knows what is going on before I do that please help. Thanks!

kevbeck43 · May 2018

The map was originally a 600x400 DD3+ map.

Loopysue · May 2018

Hi Kevbeck

If you have used the symbols at an abnormally large scale (ie the scale you pasted them at was far greater than the map default of 1) then they may be looking pixelated because they are so enlarged. Even VH resolution PF symbols have their limits. For example if I were to map an entire village on the flank of a very enlarged mountain symbol, the mountain symbol would be hellishly pixelated when I exported it. Its one of those things with bitmaps - you can't enlarge them indefinitely like you can a vector shape or symbol without getting those annoying little squares.

If there's just no way that's the problem, then I don't know what's causing it.

I think the screen shots might help a lot - and if you can do it a sample of the same area as it is rendered out.

kevbeck43 · May 2018

I will try to put up a sample but I know its not the symbol resolution. None of them are bigger than 1. It might be the resolution of some of the background. I adjusted the resolution on the stone and sand areas of the map. I'll fix those and see if that makes a difference. Like I said, its not terrible but since before they were so clean I am trying to get them back to that.

Loopysue · May 2018

LOL! Silly me! I've just re-read your post.

You have the ppi set to 5000?

The human eye is unable to discern the dots on a printed copy at around 300 ppi, so its really not necessary to go any higher than that. Some people insist on 600 ppi, but I, for one, can't see any difference after 300

How does it look if you reduce that ppi to 300?

Monsen · May 2018

How does the symbols look if you zoom in on them in CC3+? An export can never be better than what CC3+ itself shows you.

Also, an export of 6000x4000 will result in symbols being more pixelated than in CC3+ if you zoom in. For a 600x400 map, that is only 10 pixels/foot, while DD3 symbols are made in 100 pixels/foot. The effective quality of symbols at this export scale is actually the same as CC3+'s low quality symbols, which is generally fine for normal viewing of the map, but not for zoomed in battlemap type resolution (a 600x400 map is really to large to be properly exported in a resolution high enough for battlemap level zoom)

kevbeck43 · May 2018

Just switched it to 300. Its exporting now. I am going to laugh really hard at myself if that it what it is.....

Not any worse might be a little better. I will try at 600 now. Live experiment city!

kevbeck43 · May 2018

600 pixels still didn't come out like I hoped but as long as I don't zoom in to far it looks ok. I will see if I can get rid of some of the pixelization in Gimp.

Loopysue · May 2018

If you show us a sample it should be relatively easy for us to see if the pixilation is part of the symbol or part of the export

Monsen · May 2018

Note that changing the pixels/inch setting in the export dialog doesn't actually mean anything at all if you are just going to look at the image on screen. This is a setting intended for print use, where you set desired size (in inches or cm) and quality, this number is then multiplied with the size to get the actual pixels. If you manually input the pixel values, as most do, this setting means nothing until you try to print it.

LordEntrails · May 2018

6000x4000 pixels on a 600x400 foot map means that is 10 pixels per foot. That is a good reason for VTT use, but it does mean that something like a chair that is ~3 feet across is only 30 pixels, that's easy if you zoom in to see pixalation on.

If you were to print the same map, say at 300 ppi, then you would have a map with 20x13.3 inches on paper, which means a scale of ... 1:30? So your chair would be 0.1 inches printed. On screen it is much easier to zoom in that it might be in person

In general, I expect pixalation on VTT maps.

kevbeck43 · May 2018

As soon as Monsen said something about the file size for my dungeon it all came back to me. DD3+ can only handle about 300 feet on either side at the most. I basically redid the map at that size and everything seems to be a lot crisper. I am going to try to do one of my bigger city maps, like 2500x3000 in the tile maker I have from the 2017 annual. When I do this I am going to make a video of the steps I took and how things turn out.

Monsen · May 2018

Well, DD3 isn't really the limiting factor here, you can create pretty big dungeons. But there are a limit on how big you can make your export, and as discussed above, when you need high quality exports for deep zooms, you are going to need a lot of pixels per dungeon foot, something that gets pretty difficult if the map itself is large. Unless you have used the lighting system, it is pretty easy to export most dungeons in tiles though.

ProFantasy Community Forum

Loss of quality of image exports

Comments