Image Creation Questions

[Mike Soda]

I'm trying to make myself some new channel art from scratch but what I'm wondering about will apply to any future wallpapers I make too. Currently I'm creating a 2560x423 template but am wondering about the X & Y resolution options. For a while now I've just been spamming any numbers that result in a max of 65536.000 for either. I started doing that VS leaving at default because sometimes images I used in videos turned out blurry after 2 or even just 1 export. Besides getting tired of doing that though & potentially making things harder for myself when I'm putting different sized images on whatever said template, I want to know how to use this part of Gimp 2.8 the right way. If any of y'all got additional tips for image editing & creation I'd very much appreciate all feedback because I really want to get back into my Gimp hobby, it's been years since I tried anything remotely serious .

 

1: What X & Y resolution should I use for a 2560x423 banner that'll give me the absolute best quality without wasting pixels?

 

2: Is there a X & Y rule of thumb I can use for any differently sized templates in the future?

[Minbari]

If you know your banner will be 2560x423 px then use exactly those numbers or an even integer multiple of them to scale up, and maintain a constant aspect ratio. 

 

However, 2560x423 is a weird resolution unless that's what you're going for. To fill a standard widescreen monitor you want a 16:9 ratio. That's where the 1920x1080 and 3840x2160 resolutions of 1080p and UHD come from. Trying to use the maximum resolution possible really won't result in any image quality enhancement unless you have the means to display that content. 65000 pixels in any dimension has almost no practical use, so sticking to a lower number will reduce the load on your computer and lower file sizes with (very likely) no reduction in visible quality. 

[Mike Soda]

1 minute ago, Minbari said:

If you know your banner will be 2560x423 px then use exactly those numbers or an even integer multiple of them to scale up, and maintain a constant aspect ratio. 

 

However, 2560x423 is a weird resolution unless that's what you're going for. To fill a standard widescreen monitor you want a 16:9 ratio. That's where the 1920x1080 and 3840x2160 resolutions of 1080p and UHD come from. Trying to use the maximum resolution possible really won't result in any image quality enhancement unless you have the means to display that content. 65000 pixels in any dimension has almost no practical use, so sticking to a lower number will reduce the load on your computer and lower file sizes with (very likely) no reduction in visible quality. 

Thank you, 2560x423 is just what YouTube recommends for channel art (the banner at top) when viewed on most desktops. I'll try leaving it at the default 72 for now but if it looks blurry to me I'll up it to 423 or 2560.

[Minbari]

Ahhh for that widescreen format that radio would make sense. What do you mean by the default 72? 

[Mike Soda]

2 minutes ago, Minbari said:

Ahhh for that widescreen format that radio would make sense. What do you mean by the default 72? 

When creating any size image in Gimp it auto sets both X & Y values to 72. Just now read that supposedly anything higher is only needed if you're actually printing whatever you create. I wont be although like I said in the past I had issues with blurryness. However that could've been due to something else I was doing wrong I don't know.

[Minbari]

1 minute ago, Mike Soda said:

When creating any size image in Gimp it auto sets both X & Y values to 72. Just now read that supposedly anything higher is only needed if you're actually printing whatever you create. I wont be although like I said in the past I had issues with blurryness. However that could've been due to something else I was doing wrong I don't know.

 

Those X and Y 72.000 numbers are px/inches, which is directly related for print media alone, so that shouldn't be the cause of your issue. Keep your image size as 2560x423 for the youtube banner. When saving, make sure to save in the highest quality. I have no experience with GIMP, but in most photo editors when saving as a jpeg you can choose the quality to save as, so always make sure to save in the maximum quality, and in the full resolution. 

[Mike Soda]

1 minute ago, Minbari said:

Those X and Y 72.000 numbers are px/inches, which is directly related for print media alone, so that shouldn't be the cause of your issue. Keep your image size as 2560x423 for the youtube banner. When saving, make sure to save in the highest quality. I have no experience with GIMP, but in most photo editors when saving as a jpeg you can choose the quality to save as, so always make sure to save in the maximum quality, and in the full resolution. 

Thank you again, usually I use .png but will try max quality .jpg.

[Minbari]

Just now, Mike Soda said:

Thank you again, usually I use .png but will try max quality .jpg.

.png shouldn't have issues unless the output file exceeds the maximum size youtube allows and it ends up getting compressed. Maybe try saving a file locally and opening it in your file explorer and seeing how it looks or what the issue is. That can help narrow down where the problem lies

[minibois]

The X and y resolution are irrelevant to you, as you are punching in the resolution in pixels manually.

But png should give you some good quality, I have always exported the banners I made with it.

 

What kind of low quality are you talking about? Blurry or lots of compression?

[Mike Soda]

10 hours ago, Minibois said:

The X and y resolution are irrelevant to you, as you are punching in the resolution in pixels manually.

But png should give you some good quality, I have always exported the banners I made with it.

 

What kind of low quality are you talking about? Blurry or lots of compression?

I think you're right it was just compression, at the time I was also using lower target & max bitrates in Hitfilm 4 Express than some of that of the original clips. Since then I've learned to use lets say 12k target & 15k max if the actual max bitrate of a given clip I'm using is 11,149. Going a little or even way lower like I once was, might've also been the cause for the blurry text slides. It's hard to remember because I've changed so much from when I used to make content with Microsoft Expression lol. So far although I haven't finished a new background yet, the test exports I've done as .png are turning out great. The only thing holding me back so far is ideas, making something I envision completely from scratch ain't as easy as I thought. I do have 1 question related to the video part of this though. Since YouTube doesn't have a 900p player setting. If I uploaded a 1600x900 video, would it's 720p display on YouTube be sharper VS just uploading in 1280x720 initially?

[minibois]

1 hour ago, Mike Soda said:

I think you're right it was just compression, at the time I was also using lower target & max bitrates in Hitfilm 4 Express than some of that of the original clips. Since then I've learned to use lets say 12k target & 15k max if the actual max bitrate of a given clip I'm using is 11,149. Going a little or even way lower like I once was, might've also been the cause for the blurry text slides. It's hard to remember because I've changed so much from when I used to make content with Microsoft Expression lol. So far although I haven't finished a new background yet, the test exports I've done as .png are turning out great. The only thing holding me back so far is ideas, making something I envision completely from scratch ain't as easy as I thought. I do have 1 question related to the video part of this though. Since YouTube doesn't have a 900p player setting. If I uploaded a 1600x900 video, would it's 720p display on YouTube be sharper VS just uploading in 1280x720 initially?

I think you would be better off with just 720p in general, downscaling with such weird numbers wont look great.

[Mike Soda]

On 12/5/2017 at 11:56 AM, Minibois said:

I think you would be better off with just 720p in general, downscaling with such weird numbers wont look great.

Thanks!