NetNotes
As we also produce our posters for pdf [where the viewer can shop- license and media), and it will save you time as you never have to
zoom] we aim for higher dpi in the original ppt file [doesn’t do any re-make posters for different sizes, and the process itself is a lot faster.
harm] - plus I do like to nick them for other uses. I guess many of You can probably justify the cost in time savings after only one or two
our images are generally lower than 600 dpi on the actual page, posters. I know it doesn’t address Kristen’s question, as she is required
typically 300 dpi, and as you say they still look fine. There is nothing to use PowerPoint. For importing into PowerPoint (or any Office
wrong with higher resolution though. Once scaled down on-screen, application), PNG is the best file type, as it is the native compression
PowerPoint doesn’t seem to mind our ‘hi-res’ images though [at 600 for Office. I would tend to go for 300ppi, just because computers can
dpi], in terms of PC response when moving around the presentation. cope with large files, but realistically 210ppi is indistinguishable. Don’t
With any image editing/graphics design more PC memory helps a lot be confused with printers’ dpi (typically inkjet for this application),
[my laptop, 2.25GHz Pentium M] was sluggish with Photoshop CS2 at and pixels per inch. Inkjets cannot print continuous tone; they have to
512 and 1 GB RAM, but when upgraded to 2 GB [motherboard max] it place many dots to achieve the color information contained in a single
noticeably improved. Windows 32-bit has the 3-4 GB OS max though pixel. Now to preach on the alternative: InDesign links to the original
[including graphics card memory], and only 64-bit OS goes beyond the full-resolution version of all images, via the ‘place’ command, and you
4 GB max [motherboard dependent]. Keith J. Morris kjmorris@well. can work with thousands of images of very large file sizes without
ox.ac.uk Wed Apr 15 it affecting the speed or reliability of the program (it is designed
Our school has been using PowerPoint as the default software for for typesetting whole books after all) - this is because it only works
creating posters for many years. While 300 ppi is a “golden standard” with a low-resolution preview of the original file. The InDesign files
for printers (glossy magazines), it is surely overkill for posters printed themselves are never over a few megabytes. You can ‘package’ all the
with inkjet printers. From my experience printing images from linked images for a file together in the same place (this duplicates all
the XL30 SEM (about 1400*1000 pixels) at 11” image size (i.e. 127 the linked files and places them together- useful if you have linked to
ppi) produces good results. Even 100 ppi on a poster could be good originals in multiple folders spread around your computer). When you
enough. But for line drawings you need higher resolution. Vladimir M. want to have the poster printed, you export as a PDF, down-sampling
Dusevich
dusevichv@umkc.edu Thu Apr 16 all the images to the desired resolution and compression in one simple
I agree that 100 dpi is perfectly fine for poster printing of most step. The result is a very robust file, with all fonts embedded and almost
images where detail is difficult to discern anyway, say fluorescence in fool-proof for printing, that is never too large or too small for the job.
cells or tissues. You do notice low-resolution jaggies in the text and in If you want to edit an image in the poster, you don’t have to find your
things we are good at discerning, say a microscope image, illustrator original high resolution file, and make changes, down-sample and re-
image, or lab view [when we know what they should look like]. Blurred import, as you would have to do in PowerPoint. Instead, you just right-
printing on cheap paper [the standard for most poster printing] means click, and select ‘edit original’ from the contextual menu, and it opens
that the 600dpi of a modern printer is unlikely ever to be realized. So the original in Photoshop, and after making changes you close the
although we easily spend £2,000+ in man hours producing a poster, document, and the preview in InDesign will automatically update. If
we rarely spend more than £40 printing it [and for most purposes this you ever use vector files, PowerPoint is a nightmare; whereas InDesign
poster resolution is perfectly adequate anyway]. Plus the inks used may links directly to Illustrator files, and changes are very quick. And the
be rubbish; our University-printed posters have all faded in a month PDFs created by InDesign will obviously contain perfect copies of the
or two after being left up in a windowless lab [obviously not HP inks vector information, so even if you do lose all versions of a diagram,
and HP photographic paper where the inks are guaranteed fast for except a low-resolution PDF of a A0 poster designed for printing
100 years]. Fine for posters you use once and bin, but a pain for our A4 as hand-outs, you can open the PDF in Illustrator and copy the
constantly re-used & recycled Core Facility poster. However, I would perfect diagram out of the file. These are all in addition to the much
still advise against going to lower than say 1,000x750 for an image more sophisticated text tools (justified text with complete control over
whatever size it’s going to be printed, if you think you might possibly the balance between enlarged spaces between words or letters and
use it again. Our Core poster has 40+ images going back 5 years, and hyphenation), automatic alignment tools, and the ability to instantly
the ‘master’ hi-res images are simply lost to history. Probably they were spread items at equal spacing, or a pre-set spacing. Ben Micklem ben.
deleted from my processors personal hard drive space when he left, and
micklem@pharm.ox.ac.uk Tue Apr 21
probably they weren’t all ours, but from our collaborators/users. So it is As Vlad, Ben and others have commented, the best program is
an incredible pain to find that all our images on our main poster ppt files not always the one being used to make posters. In our central facility,
are about 250x300 max pixel size - with multiple backups at different we produce many hundreds of posters a year. The vast majority are
locations, it’s often only the poster master ppt file itself that survives. produced using PowerPoint, or, as our graphics person calls it,
If, at a later date, I want to increase the printed image size from 2x1.5” ProblemPoint. If done properly (a rare event), the results can be as
to say 6x4.5” the pixilation is very noticeable. Plus they look bad in good as those obtained using InDesign. However, when problems are
Core PowerPoint and pdf presentations - and we are supposed to be the encountered, it takes a long time to figure out why PP is not producing
kings of imaging. You can get by, say by upscaling and re-adding text at posters that print properly. We only rarely have this problem with
higher res - but what a pain, more hours in Photoshop, and with typical InDesign. We have been using InDesign (and previously PageMaker,
day rates of about £400+. And the extra file size of the larger images in Quark and Illustrator) to produce posters over the years, but when
the original ppt poster file would have been insignificant on a modern researchers bring in “pre-made” posters, it is nearly always a PP job.
PC. Keeping track of digital images for the next 30 years is just about When problems are encountered (usually due to the Postscript printer
impossible, if I want an image from one of my old papers these days I balking at the PP hack job), the harried researchers want to know
have scan the printed copy. I guess I produce 10,000+ digital images “the best” program to use. We always recommend they purchase the
a year at home and at work these days. Backup is one thing, finding Adobe Design Suite CS4. More and more researchers are doing this
a particular image again quickly years on is another matter. Keith J. and the word is slowly getting around. It will take time and patience.
Morris
kjmorris@well.ox.ac.uk Tue Apr 21 This summer we will be giving a series of training sessions on how to
I’m sorry if this sounds harsh Keith, but it seems a little odd to produce high quality posters using the CS4 Design Suite (Photoshop,
me that you use PowerPoint, designed for on-screen presentations, to Illustrator, InDesign and Acrobat). We’ll see if this improves the
produce posters. It is under £120 for you to buy InDesign CS4 (OUCS situation. I believe it will. John J. Bozzola
bozzola@siu.edu Tue Apr 21
68
www.microscopy-today.com • 2009 September
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76