...because I really hate asking newb questions.

Okay. Here's what I've got:
I'm working on self-producing a small card game. I've used Inkscape to do the layout and all the art for the cards and they look great, problem is, my printer needs me to submit individual images (PNG, JPEG, whatever) to size and of a printable quality.

so

I need to output my work at 2.6x3.6 inches and at least 200dpi.
Is this a possibility or am I just asking for something that simply doesn't exist? When I export a PNG in Inkscape and ask for 200dpi it makes my image about 4 times the size it needs to be.
I've used CorelDRAW to export PNGs and it lets me chose my size and dpi without corelation between the two... is it just lying to me or using some sort of compression?

Thanks a ton!
Chevee

Is it polite to answer yourself?
I was going to delete the post, but maybe someone was wondering this same thing and will one day search for it.

Apparently, when it gets to the printer, size doesn't matter... dpi does.
So, if you take a 2.6x3.6 drawing and step it up to 300dpi, you get a 780x1080 image... which is HUGE on your monitor. BUT, when the printer's 300dpi printer gets ahold of it, it prints 2.6x3.6
It's the magic of math.
2.6 x 300 = 780
3.6 x 300 = 1080

So, run that through a 300dpi printer and the output ix 2.6x3.6
Neat. I just could grasp that. Why doesn't anyone ever explain that with math? Makes so much more sense.

There it is.
Chevee

Inkscape isn't lying to you lol. The size you get when you export to 200dpi is correct.

To get enough quality for picture to view it on screen it is enough to have 72 dpi. That means there are 72 dots, or dot color information per one inch of the picture. For printing it is usually considered you need 300 dpi, so you need a lot more dots per inch to get a "normal" looking picture printed on paper.

That is why when you export to print, but view it on screen it looks huge. It's because screen and print have different picture quality demands.

If you open your image in GIMP for example you can check the canvas or image size (in or mm for example) and you'll see the image is the right size, the one you set in Inkscape. Also when you send that image to be printed, and if you set the image should be scaled to 100% (meaning no scale) it will come out the correct size (not going into your printer calibration settings).

heh you beat me to it

prkos wrote:Inkscape isn't lying to you lol. The size you get when you export to 200dpi is correct.

To get enough quality for picture to view it on screen it is enough to have 72 dpi. That means there are 72 dots, or dot color information per one inch of the picture. For printing it is usually considered you need 300 dpi, so you need a lot more dots per inch to get a "normal" looking picture printed on paper.

That is why when you export to print, but view it on screen it looks huge. It's because screen and print have different picture quality demands.

If you open your image in GIMP for example you can check the canvas or image size (in or mm for example) and you'll see the image is the right size, the one you set in Inkscape. Also when you send that image to be printed, and if you set the image should be scaled to 100% (meaning no scale) it will come out the correct size (not going into your printer calibration settings).

heh you beat me to it

Thanks for the reply anyway. I never thought about checking canvas size in another program. Genius!
This learning how to be a graphic designer stuff is hard work!
I wishi I could afford a professional!

Thanks!
Chevee

Chevee wrote:Why doesn't anyone ever explain that with math? Makes so much more sense.

The maths usually confuses people even more. If you stick with Inkscape, all you have to do is set the page size, and at 1:1 zoom it's the correct size on the screen, and likewise prints out at the same size on the printer. The fact that the screen and printer have different DPI is handled automatically behind the scenes.

On the initial subject, in case you haven't heard of it: BoardGameGeek DIYers seem keen on a company called Artscow, which has a web-based interface for creating user-defined card packs cheaply (for prototyping, at least). Never done it myself, though.

Slow Dog wrote:On the initial subject, in case you haven't heard of it: BoardGameGeek DIYers seem keen on a company called Artscow, which has a web-based interface for creating user-defined card packs cheaply (for prototyping, at least). Never done it myself, though.

Oh, trust me, I've been a BGGer since 03.
I designed a game that I released there... all done in Inkscape.
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/37755
I'm a cartoonist at best, and the design of those cards was JUST as I was learning Inkscape last summer, so I'd like to go back and update some stuff... but meh. It is what it is. I don't regret it.

I'm trying ArtsCow and SuperiorPOD right now. ArtsCow actually has a recommended size of 780x1081 which is how I figured this whole thing out. ArtsCow has a nice designer interface on the website that uses Microsoft Silverlight and makes setup a snap because you upload individual images (780x1081) and drop them into their online template. SuperiorPOD on the other hand has a downloadable template that you must use to create entire print pages for them... and they don't do any color correction... so it's going to be a lot of experimenting with them.

Thanks!
Chevee

Chevee wrote:[SuperiorPOD on the other hand has a downloadable template that you must use to create entire print pages for them...

That appears to be a theoretically easier process - Import/Mock up the entire page in Inkscape at 1:1 scale, position/draw cards in the correct positions, and export the lot at correct DPI in one go.

The danger is that one mistake stuffs the lot.

Okay... to continue this discussion, I tried an experiment last night and now I'm confused:

What if, I set my page size in Pixles to 780x1081 and then render it out. If I want to render it to 100% (780x1081) exporter tells me it will be 90dpi. Is that normal? Is rendering a 780x1081 at 90dpi the same as rendering a 2.6x3.6 @ 300dpi?

Thanks!
Chevee

I thought you understood this :innocent whistle:

Chevee wrote:What if, I set my page size in Pixles to 780x1081 and then render it out. If I want to render it to 100% (780x1081) exporter tells me it will be 90dpi. Is that normal?

Yep. A Windows desktop is (nominally) 90dpi. So, exporting an image set to 780x1081 with default dpi gets you a png (or whatever) image that's 780x1081 pixels.

Is rendering a 780x1081 at 90dpi the same as rendering a 2.6x3.6 @ 300dpi?

Well, strictly speaking, no. 780@90dpi would be 8.67 Inches across, when displayed on your screen. But printed at 300dpi, you get something that's 780/300 = 2.6inches across, which is want you want.
.
.
.
Here's what to do:
Set your Inkscape page size to "2.6x3.6 Inches". That's your target size; don't worry about pixels.
- Draw Picture -
Now, when exporting your bitmap for printing, in the bitmap dialogue, set the DPI value to 300, for that's the DPI of your target printer. Still don't worry about pixels!*. Export. The exported document is exactly the right size to produce a 2.6x3.6 card on a 300dpi printer.

(*Knowing you still will be worried about pixels, at this point Inkscape will tell you your 2.6x3.6in card at 300dpi is 780x1080 pixels)