DPI is not as important as you might think. And DPI can be seen this way, or that way :)

Images are usually not saved with a DPI specification. Or with a size specification for printing. An image has pixels. That's it usually.

If you load an image, then it's up to the software how it interprets the number of pixels available (which in your case Photoshop did). If you want a different value (size or DPI) then the other value changes accordingly. Because the image has only a certain number of pixels, which you can distribute in different densities (DPI) on an area (image size). If you change both parameters at the same time, the software must either take away points (reduce) or invent some (enlarge).

https://snapshop.cam/dpi/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dots_per_inch

@igohigh, adding to the previous answer, as DPI is usually relevant at print time, what is your expected use of the image? Is it for use in digital mediums/web or physical/paper? If it is digital think pixels.

EVargas.Art

Yes, I do understand Dpi fairly well (Xerox and Sharp Electronic tech and Instructor for twenty years). My target output is Printing and that is where the Dpi does effect quality. True digital really caps off at 72dpi for Internet viewing and anything over 600dpi is determined not really noticeable by the human eye (I have not taught for ten years now and memory might get a bit fuzzy) My current Cannon Laser jet printer always tosses me a warring if I send a 'photo image' that is less then 300dpi. In this case I am printing to a Polar Matallic paper and Dpi does become noticeable especially under 200dpi. I know I can change the Dpi of an image in Photoshop but is that not just letting the software 'add pixels'?

I am mainly trying to get a grasp on why Poser allows me to set the Pixel 'size' of the image and the Dpi but upon saving it comes up 72dpi yet keeps the denominational size I set. I will have to play, but perhaps it is because I Exported in PNG? Perhaps if I export in PSD or TIF then the selected Dpi is output into the rendered image?? (I know some apps are quirky that way)

Agree that's strange, I don't output for printing but since it got me thinking I did some tests here in Poser 12. I see the same issue happening with all formats: EXR, BMP, PSD, TIF (all became 72dpi coming from a Poser original 300dpi). Exception is the TGA, this one became 96dpi...

EVargas.Art

Thanks evergas, I seemed to find the same thing only I didn't check the TGA (never use them). So would this be a "bug" to report or 72dpi just what Poser does? Or is there something we are not understanding about how Poser handles these values? I think I recall long ago (maybe P2, 3, or 4) I noticed this too but this is the first time I wanted to print on special paper where Dpi becomes noticeable.

I also tried setting my dimensions using Pixels and by using Inches....both way it will remember my settings when I reopen the file but both ways spits out out as 72dpi. I do get a nice crisp image (as viewed on the computer screen) but not sure once I tell Photoshop to increase 72dpi and shrink the Print Size if it will pixilate on the expensive paper?? I did try doing a 1600x900 with 300dpi and it too reverted to 72dpi when I opened it in Photoshop, when I zoomed in for some editing - it was pretty pixilated, not at all a 300dpi image.

If you use Photoshop's Image Size dialog, uncheck Resample, and change the dpi to whatever you want - the dimensions will change but the pixel count will remain the same.

----------------------------------------

Not approved by Scarfolk Council. For more information please reread. Or visit my local shop.

Did previous versions do this correctly?

I thought that dialog just did the pixel calculation for you, did it actually set a dpi as well?

regards
prixat

@igohigh if you can uncheck the resample option in photoshop as @caisson said I believe you are fine. From the little I know your worst enemy here would be some kind of resampling. If Poser sent the pixels and PS preserved the pixels it sounds good.

EVargas.Art

Okay, just to be clear: when I specify 300 dpi in Poser and export to JPG, it will save as 72 DPI. It has been verified several times. It has not been the case in previous versions: what I said I want 300 dpi, it saved in 300 dpi .

Anyone knows why this is? What am I missing?

I am probably wrong but my feelings were:

I need 10 inches wide
I need 300DPI, which means: 300X10=3000 pixels wide for the final picture
In Poser: request 3000px wide, whatever Poser's DPI

𝒫𝒽𝓎𝓁

(っ◔◡◔)っ

👿 Win11 on i9-13900K@5GHz, 64GB, RoG Strix B760F Gamng, Asus Tuf Gaming RTX 4070 OC Edition, 1 TB SSD, 6+4+8TB HD
👿 Mac Mini M2, Sonoma 14.6.1, 16GB, 500GB SSD
👿 Nas 10TB
👿 Poser 13 and soon 14 ❤️

Long discussion about a simple thingy.

Pixel is a dimensionless term. There is no specification how big a pixel is. How big it SHOWS is depending on the used hardware, printer, monitor, scanner, camera, etc. For example with a inkjet-printer a pixel can be seen as one dot coming from the spray valve..
According to that pixel definition a image consists of its size, e.g. paper 11 * 8,5 inch, AND the resolution what the technical equippement can/shall print, show, scan etc. And this resolution is normally named in DPI = Dot per Inch, sometimes olderwise I have found also PPI = Pixel per Inch. DPI is normally convienient on paper where PPI was used for monitors ... in the times there you could count them directly on the screen without magnifying glas :-) So in this case igohigh wanted a papersize of 11 * 8,5 inch with a resolution of 300 DPI. Poser did that correctly I guess. But Photoshop has by default a other interpretation and shows as 72 DPI in size 45.828x35.412 inches. If you divide 300 through 72 you get a factor 4.16666. Now multiplicate the 11 or 8.5 inch with that factor and you get relatively exact the sizes 45,8... or 35.4,,, So nothing has changed to the pixel content of the file and caisson is absolutely right with his hint to change the DPI in Photoshop with out resampling the stuff.

Every time output size, e.g. a paper sheet, and resolution go hand in hand and determine how much pixels come into the file, on paper, on monitor or for example on a film. For example old diapositive films had DPI of 2500 and more depending on the graininess of the emulsion. Photoshop and also TGA use that low DPI count as a relict of times there monitor could not handle more.

@Rhia474 if that is a new Poser bug (I don't believe) can only be said if your given output size in inches stayed the same. You have only named the DPI but not the image size.

@Y-Phil: nearly but you need to specify both the paper size and the DPI. Think you have set 3000 DPI and Poser finds same scales for the paper or monitor width. That will give mismatch and Poser normally use the monitor width as output size.

Okay, sorry, I wasn't clear. Screenshot of details on two renders that are pretty close to size: one is a P11, the other is a P12 render. In both, the dimensions are rather close, yet the P11 JPG shows 300 dpi and the P12 image shows 72 dpi, even though in both I specified 300 DPI.

I may be dense, but I need small words to explain this to me--I'm not a computer expert, I'm not a printing expert, I just noticed that this is happening.

Poser 11 render:

Poser 12:

@Rhia474: Indeed thats a bit misleding cause there are only named the DPI and pixel dimensions. That's only the half of the story. The first image is having width of 1069 pixel / 300 DPI = 3.563333 inch and the second image has 1343 / 72 = 18.65277 inch. These dialogs are from Microsoft given properties dialog, i'm right ? Ok, MS is not God ( maybe even some floors deeper ;-) ) so what is missing is the size of the paper this shall be printed. So how good the resolution will come out is undefined. As far as I remember (not at my Poser PC) the size dimension can be given in pixels or in inch, cm or such real values. Would be interesting if you load both into for example Photoshop what that will say to the dimensions.

There is at least one format, BMP - very old and lossless like TGA, there I have often worked with the pixel cause they get saved line by line straight behind into the file. And therefor it's rather simply to calculate the length of a diagonal line through saved image by using the Pythagoras formula a² + b² = c². c is the searched diagonal length and with a and b its easy to determine the y,x-coordinates of the given start and end points cause they parallel with the x and y axis. We have used that to determine the precission of tools in rubber industries. Works only with lossless saved images cause the pixel count in compressed files like jpeg is variable.

By the way to keep it not to easy also the Bit depth is having impact in declaring how colorful the image will be. 24 is meaning that 3 Bytes are used, 1 Byte = 8 Bit = 256 (correct 255 cause counting from 0). So 24 Bit is RGB, one Byte for one color-range either red, green or blue and is normally called true color. For example GIF is normally often 8 bit and so not true color. Also black-white images normally only need 2 Bit and are tiny. For my example with BMP above it's essential cause one Pixels is representated by 3 direcly following bytes. In the great times of GIF BMP and TGA and TIF were most important cause able to save true color. JPG came later to reduce the immense size of the files. In times of harddisks below 1 GB and floppy disks essential but with the price of reduction losses.

Oh, where are the times if I now look to my terabytes of hardisks ... but no chance one has stayed - MS Windows will fill them with tons of shit nobody is finding and needing ... :-o

Okay, so how is this? Same scene, same render dimensions, rendered in P11 and P12. Exact same properties.

How is one 72 and the other 300 dpi when nothing changed except the render software and I told both to render in same dpi?

For reference, the images:

Poser 11:

and Poser 12:

Ok, thats looking strange like a bug in P12. The P12 image is having worse resolution accordingly to 72 DPI.

But again the dialogs showing nothing about a real inch size for the images. I don't have P12. Is it possible that there is a inch scaling value for the rendered output. Though that must be tiny cause Poser is reducing the DPI but seems not to enlarge the inch by inch scale. Otherwise both images should look equal.

Here I'm finished with my experience. Looks like a job for the Poser developer :-( ... I'm waiting with my P12 money a further round ...

Yeah. I'll see if I can report this. Thanks for trying to explain this to my heavily math-challenged self.

Ha. It appears I already reported this back in February. Which is slightly ridiculous. Bit this is the response I got:

So, to the OP: it is a problem that is known. And it will be addressed, you know. Soon.

Okay all, thank you much. And yes, Rhia474, your samples is pretty much what I am getting (loss of resolution) which when printed out on high quality/special papers does degrade the print. I might also have added above to clarify: When I set out on this project I first created a Blank document in Photoshop and set it to my desired Print dimension in Dpi, Print Size (inches), and noted PS's Pixel dimension. I then set my Poser dimension to those settings and rendered. It was not until I went into Photoshop that I noticed the change. These are my settings *the P12 I just toggled Pixel to Inch to see if they matched my sample document in Photoshop, for in Photoshop if you change any One value it will change another (ie: Print size changes Pixel dimension but not Dpi, Dpi will change Pixel dimension but not Print size).

Just to verify that it is Not a PhotoShop 'thing' I have checked my render (should be 300dpi) in Three different editing apps: PhotoShop, PaintShopPro, and Affinity All are saying the saved render is only 72dpi and the Pixel Dimension is correct but the Print Size has change - SO; Poser is keeping the Pixel Dimension but changing the other other two. @JoEtzold: the Resample function is for PhotoShop (and others) when Resizing an image, it does not effect what the original image is as originally opened in the app. Yes it is a way to figit with resizing but doing so it Manipulates the Dpi/Pixel Dimension of the image (add/remove) in attempt to maintain overall resolution - kind of like the high end apps such as MegaPixel from Topaz Labs (which I don't have....yet)

While waiting for a conclusion on this issue; I do have Poser 11 but I might have to tweak some materials and settings.....I kinda liked how it came out in P12 an was hoping to do some post work before printing but as the Polar Metalic paper is not cheap....I will have to hold off and think this all through

Rhia474 posted at 10:36PM Sun, 12 September 2021 - #4427246

For reference, the images:

Those images look like you have depth of field enabled in P12. That would create areas that are fuzzier based on distance from the camera. I think that likely explains the apparent quality differences.

But for your other point, although for many purposes DPI is basically meaningless and only resolution really matters, and DPI can be changed without changing a single pixel if the resolution remains the same, DPI is still denoted in many types of image files, and that DPI may affect for example the size of the image when you embed it, or if you print it in an application that does not give you the opportunity to do any scaling, etc. It's apparent from your comparisons that Poser is failing to write that information and the images remain at the default DPI of the format. Given your comparison between P11 and P12, that bug must have appeared new in P12.

If resolution remains constant and DPI changes, then necessarily the image size must change, because any of those values is a function of the other two (regardless of the application).

@ChromeStar: I'm with you generally. But I have a bit problem like you use the word "resolution" (may be it's a german-english problem of me). With a look to the Photoshop example in the post above yours it's like I understand.

On one hand there is the PIXEL DIMENSIONS in height-pixel and width-pixel giving the resulting file size of the image in megabyte, kilobyte or such. And on the other hand there is the DOCUMENT SIZE given in height-inches and width-inches (or if choosen cm or such) AND the resolution what is the DPI. And DPI is the bridge between both blocks e.g. changing that DPI while pixel dimensions keeps the same will change the document size in inches.

And @igohigh that Photoshop example is from your starting post and if you change the DPI to 300 you should get 11 and 8.5 inches without resampling instead of those 45 and 35. So Poser and Photoshop are on the same road although one is driving on right side and the other left side. So that should be ok. And is not the same problem what Rhia474 is reporting although I'm not sure cause I know only pixel dimensions and DPI from her post and not the document size in inches what MS is not reporting in it's dialogs. What I really don't understand is your PaintShopPro example. There is a DPI of 28 with paper size 4535 and coming to 72 with 11185 inches paper size. Strange .... could it be that you have given the decimal point one position to far and how does it come to the 28.350 DPI in original ?

@Rhia474: Could it be that this depth of field like ChromeStar is guessing could be the point. Don't know if you are having Photoshop but most other 2d-programs should do also. Tried you to put both images into Photoshop and had a look to the document (paper) size in relation to DPI ? Btw. John Csaki answers are often a bit like the famous "soon" from DAZ support. February this year is not so bad cause I got such answers years ago in SmithMicro times on problems I reported and waiting up to now for corrections ... :-O

I can run them with no DoF but i guarantee the result will be the same because it is always the same in P12. I ask for 300 dpi, I get 72 regardless of size of render. But i will report back for science after I get off work this evening.. :)

@JoEtzold ; I am not sure where you are getting the figures you are throwing out there? I do not see them in my screen shots "DPI of 28 with paper size 4535 and coming to 72 with 11185"? I am working with 300dpi and the saved renders are coming out at 72dpi with the Print Dimension changed not the Pixel Dimension. Also, I am not 'putting' a decimal point anywhere, this is what the applications are reading off the Poser saved render? And I am not seeing where you see "28.350 DPI in original" in any of the posts above....are we all working off of this particular post??

Another example: (all JPG no RAW) My Cellphone takes images at 72dpi My Cannon camera at 180dpi A friend's high end camera at 300dpi

Each photo opens up with the appropriate Dpi. Changing Resolution (Dpi) with Resample On directly changes Pixel Dimension (not document print size) - meaning it spreads pixels out or deletes and compresses Changing Resolution with Resampling Off changes the Document size (print dimension) but not Pixel Dimension - in either case it must, at digital dimension, alter and thus effect clarity. The very purpose of high end (now gone AI) Resize Applications. It would seem that along your path there would be no need for such applications in the Print World for all we have to do is turn off Resample and change numbers and the Quality is going to remain the same....?

Just to clarify this stuff finally by image. I use a picture I made some days ago with Canon 2000 camera with autofocus used. Therefor the green in front is sharp while second left pink flower is a bit unsharp. Every the same ... me and my camera sometimes having different meanings about the exact focus ... so it shall be .... :-)

I have checked with Photoshop DPI is 72, in good old PhotoImpact which I used to size this examples the DPI is 96 and to show the data I used IrfanView (best freeware image viewer !!!) with again 72 DPI. And also the EXIF-data (see below) saved by the camera showing DPI as 72.

Now Irfans information directly after opening image for view:

I marked the original pixel size and the DPI and the resulting paper size in cm and also inch.

And now I changed the DPI from 72 to 300. Look for paper size in cm/inch. It changed but no change to pixel size and also no change in the file on disk. Thats the same as in Photoshop changing DPI without resample. If you let Photoshop resample it will hold the paper size and change the pixel size. So this means changing the image as such.

Now at least the EXIF data from camera stored:

Filename - IMG_0193.JPG Make - Canon Model - Canon EOS 2000D Orientation - Top left XResolution - 72 YResolution - 72 ResolutionUnit - Inch DateTime - 2021:09:07 14:22:21 Copyright - Joachim Etzold ISOSpeedRatings - 200 ShutterSpeedValue - 1/128 seconds ApertureValue - F 6.44 FocalLength - 55 mm ColorSpace - sRGB ExifImageWidth - 2976 ExifImageHeight - 1984 AF Image Width - 2976 AF Image Height - 1984

So in total as long as you define a pixel size in Poser the DPI is of nearly no interest as ChromeStar said. The DPI comes in view if you decide where to output the stuff for optimal scaling. Printer are having better resolution as monitors and all the best resolution can be achieved using foto emulsions like dia films or papers. Than you can set the DPI to size the given pixel dimensions optimal for the used material.

@igohigh : You can use Photoshop to make your correction but first change to 300 DPI without resampling and you should get the desired 11 x 8.5 inch. You can make first a control print with standard paper to save the expensive stuff and if you are satisfied with resolution go for finish.

@igohigh : to start with last sentence of your last post resolution = DPI is NOT a absolute terminus. Fullstop. Resolution is a relation of given pixel count and used output format. So as stated in your very first post you have advised Poser to make 300 DPI for 11 x 8.5 inch paper and Poser did so. But now looking on the image Photoshop is telling you 72 DPI at 45.828 x 35.412 inches (your post). You can calculate with pocket calculator as I state posts in front or let it do by Photoshop by changing the DPI without resample. The pixel size stays the same and you get the 11 x 8.5 inches. Thats fact both is the same in result.

And now to the 28.350 DPI ... some posts ago you have shown dialogs from Photoshop (correct) and PaintShopPro. Have a look to that and is there standing in the left column overtitled original this DPI count. = resolution 28.350 and in the right column overtitled New 111.096 and 85.848. These are inputable fields. May be this comes out cause you have activated resampling. Also like in Photoshop resampling have to be disabled. Have a look for your stuff.

The DPI comes not from the saved file. The programs are checking this by the given pixel count (bytes) in file and their default output settings in papersize. As also the cameras do so depending on the technical possibilities of their chipset, in former times the quality uf the used film depending on grainyness, light factor, etc. For example a 100 or 200 ASA film was good for daylight and sun, on christmas market you needed better than 400 ASA. My Canon digital can go up to more than 4000 ASA. No formerly could buy such a expensive material. Thats are technical facts. But never the less the canon is writing into EXIF data 72 DPI with a adequate output size which is not known in that moment.

Ok and now I'm out of this discussion cause all is said so far.

igohigh posted at 2:17PM Mon, 13 September 2021 - #4427311

Another example: (all JPG no RAW) My Cellphone takes images at 72dpi My Cannon camera at 180dpi A friend's high end camera at 300dpi

This might not keep standing in fact someone looking along and is fully confused.

Have just looked into the handbook. My Canon EOS 2000D is a 24 Megapixel camera. Exactly can save up to 6000 x 4000 pixels as image on memory. So with respect to the often named 11 x 8.5 inch paper size a very very simple calculation. We divide 6000 through 11 and 4000 through 8.5. The result is 545,4545 horizontal and 470.5882 vertical and thats the DPI my Canon can produce and it's not the high end model cause there are camera's with 36 megapixel and more.

And I assist ADP's post near start of the thread to read the both links he has given. Especially the first one ... very true and remarkable

@JoEtzold ; I am trying to follow you, truly I am, I am reading and re-reading all that you say. However - I too have PhotoImpact and have used it for years. I just fired it up and it too is saying that Poser 12's output render is 72dpi not the set 300dpi I input. So I fail to see how your applications are giving you different Properties for the same image? Perhaps you need to check your preference settings but I am not sure where to tell you to look as I see no setting in PhotoShop, PaintShopPro, Affinity, or PhotoImpact to tell it to 'Change' a file's properties upon opening it. Sorry I have no freeware apps however I used to use GIMP quit heavy years ago. I have worked with Photo Images since the early'ish 1990s when Sharp Electronics Corp sent me to San Fransisco to be trained direct by the makers of the FIERY systems (for color printers). I have had many classes in handling photos for print however this is something I had never ran across; usually the apps output what they are told and when opened in other apps they are what they were saved as.

HOWEVER, despite several of your calculations and oddities in your apps that just don't jive with any of the apps I have sited here (not even you recent PhotoImpact) I am now getting the jest of what you are saying: Uncheck Resample to it will Keep the Pixel Dimension size (which is correct) and change the file's calculated size to the 'Document Print" Size and "Resolution" (dpi) that Poser12 was told to render in the Quality and Clarity should remain the same....correct? ie: I ask Poser to render at 3300x2550 with a document size of 11x8.5 at 300dpi When the output render property is read by the Image Editor as 3300x2550 with a document size of 45.828x35.412 at 72dpi If I change the Document size by UnChecking the "Resample" function then edit either Document size or Resolution then the "Pixel Dimensions" remain the same just the spread of Dots Per Inch (Dpi) is altered, thus bringing me back to the document specifications I had asked Poser to render out.....Okay, I can see that should then in fact keep my resolution.

Still seems buggy to me that cameras and image editors can Save Out an image or photo in the specified "properties" but with P12 you have to correct it's mistake before sending to a printer or you may not like the outcome. I am not in habit of letting a printer "fit to page" when I an concerned about print Quality, same as an editor does not make image changes in a word editor (but perhaps not as extreme)

But I do now see what you are saying, this will work. Just an extra step and quirk I have never had to pay attention to before. For print size changes I usually allow On1 Photo Raw to handle that as the application is very good at it...but I usually crop and edit as close as i can before making such size changes.

Rhia474 posted at 8:36PM Mon, 13 September 2021 - #4427305

I can run them with no DoF but i guarantee the result will be the same because it is always the same in P12. I ask for 300 dpi, I get 72 regardless of size of render. But i will report back for science after I get off work this evening.. :)

It's not going to change that. It's not expected to change that. It has nothing to do with that whatsoever. What turning off depth of field will do is remove the fuzziness so that the amount of detail will be the same uniformly throughout the image in P11 vs P12. That's all.

JoEtzold posted at 8:38PM Mon, 13 September 2021 - #4427304

@ChromeStar: I'm with you generally. But I have a bit problem like you use the word "resolution" (may be it's a german-english problem of me). With a look to the Photoshop example in the post above yours it's like I understand.

On one hand there is the PIXEL DIMENSIONS in height-pixel and width-pixel giving the resulting file size of the image in megabyte, kilobyte or such. And on the other hand there is the DOCUMENT SIZE given in height-inches and width-inches (or if choosen cm or such) AND the resolution what is the DPI. And DPI is the bridge between both blocks e.g. changing that DPI while pixel dimensions keeps the same will change the document size in inches.

When I said "resolution" I meant the actual total number of pixels in the image. That's because the term is somewhat ambiguous about whether it is resolution of a sensor, a total image size, or print density; for clarity I should have said total pixel dimensions instead.

Let me just restate my point with that corrected, and you can tell me whether it makes sense.

But for your other point, although for many purposes DPI is basically meaningless and only total pixel dimension really matters, and DPI can be changed without changing a single pixel if the total pixel dimension remains the same, DPI is still denoted in many types of image files, and that DPI may affect for example the size of the image when you embed it, or if you print it in an application that does not give you the opportunity to do any scaling, etc. It's apparent from your comparisons that Poser is failing to write that information and the images remain at the default DPI of the format. Given your comparison between P11 and P12, that bug must have appeared new in P12.

If total pixel dimensions remain constant and DPI changes, then necessarily the image size must change, because any of those values is a function of the other two (regardless of the application).

For the record, I checked my renders and neither had DoF enabled. What you see is the image on the EZDome.

Again, both renders I posted above, without DoF were the exact same height and width, both were set to render 300 DPI. Poser 11 rendered it as such, while Poser 12 rendered as 72 DPI. Poser 11 test scene rendered JPG size is 721 kB, Poser 12 scene size rendered JPG size is 631 KB.

While this discussion has been immensely educational for me (and probably many others) regarding Photoshop and image sizes in general, the fact remains: Poser 12 renders images in 72 dpi regardless of size or what you tell the program. It is a bug, and has been reported as such by me and probably many others. As of today, there is no fix, except rendering your image out in huuuuge size even for smaller output.

It is a bug. They should fix it. But that said, you can trivially change that DPI value in Photoshop or whatever graphics software you want without re-rendering or changing the pixel dimensions you are rendering it. E.g. https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/image-size-resolution.html

I'm more concerned about the difference in detail, which is an entirely separate issue. If you haven't already submitted those images to support, I think it's worth doing so and have them look at what's going on.

I wonder if the "Detail" part could be the two Render Engines themselves and how they handle various materials. I have not been active here for some time but I have been lurking and reading virtually EVERYTHING since P12 came out. I have heard a lot about the two engines and some differences they have but not actually been playing back and forth but rather just trying to learn Physical Base nodes and Cycles. Which is why I am not certain I can even take my current scene back into P11 for a useful comparison.

In my current project I have used a Render Setting provided by Ghostship provide in one of their recent products labeled "CPU Final" Adaptive Sampling then tweaked the values way up to bake the image; currently about an hour+ render time opposed to original settings that render in about 15-20 minutes (on my system).

But as I have not grasped what JoEtzold was saying; "Pixel Dimension" is the Constant (provided you don't allow the image editor to 'resample') It does appear that P12 is saving out the programed values but just writing the file's 'Properties' incorrect - which is what, in my case, a Printer is going to use to put to paper.....so that, at this time, must be manually edited before sending to print.

As I recall many years ago (P3, 4, maybe 5) the engineers back then once said that Poser had a limit of "Dpi" (dots per inch) that it's algorithms could produce...long time ago but for conversation I will say 150dpi (?) so I was told that even thou I can Input '600dpi' the actual render would never truly be rendered above 150dpi. So perhaps a question....for 'Render to Print' .....might be: What is Poser 12's true capability of Dpi

Yes I grasp now "Pixel Dimension" but within that 'dimension' there is a set number of 'pixels' - Seeing as Poser if labeling the output file as "72dpi" within the Pixel Dimension set; Is 72 dots per inch really all the Render Engine capable of doing? Or if I ask for 3000x3000 Pixels, can it 'see' to rendering 300 dots per inch within that area? Or will you always only get (at digital level) 72 rendered dots per inch within the area?

I guess I am not trying view the Render Engine from a CCD element point of view.... how many Dots can it see/render within a One Square Inch area?

Just a guess, It could be made on purpose to speed up the render time in Poser 12 using Superfly and the reason why it never has been addressed to be fixed. It is known that Increasing the Dpi will cause a drastic increase of render time no matter the size, resizing actually does not Increase the Dpi as larger size will just keep the 72dpi and will render faster no matter what. Most users use a setting of 90 ++ dpi to get a good result basically 150-300 is the most used setting. So my thought is that it is not a bug it rather seems to be the render speed up key, or at least a part of it. Else it would of been addressed already a while ago.

I would be stunned if the DPI setting affected the output in any way other than DPI. A pixel is what needs to be rendered, more pixels takes longer. If you change the physical size of a pixel from 1/72nd of an inch to 1/300th of an inch, it's still one pixel.

Look, if it was a feature, I wouldn't have been told this is known and will be addressed in a future release.

Actually it is a important feature for small sized details in a Image. it is on how many Pixles dots you will have on a surface of one Inch PPi . the 72 dpi is the Ideal resolution for web as it keeps the size low . But lets look at at this

" Generally, a 600 DPI scan is the best image resolution and pixel count for paper photographs. High resolutions above 600 DPI are better suited for professional archive work due to the longer scan time and larger storage requirements. "

" 2400, 3200 and 4800 dpi — are intended for capturing really small and highly detailed sources like film negatives and slides. "

you can't take a render that was made with 72Dpi into a photo app expecting to bet a better quality by increasing the Dpi to 300. If Poser 12 is having the issue not being able increasing the Px per Inch and just render web based resolution then you might be better off with prior Poser releases to have Pro results. sure takes a little longer, but quality takes it's time.

If one renders a Image of 1500 x 1500 he will expect it to be that size and not 10 times larger because of increasing the Pixel per Inch for better detailed quality on the mentioned size. If you render screen resolution ( Size ) and increase the Dpi you will get a higher detail on the actual size being able to zoom in 200, 300, 400 % on small details without a loss or blurry artefacts.

I'm getting more and more confused with all this. For me, a pixel is a pixel, and the DPI are related to the "device" that is going to show/print" it. If someone needs more details, depending on the "final device", then increase the number of pixels of the rendered picture.

𝒫𝒽𝓎𝓁

(っ◔◡◔)っ

An other reason why a Dpi working feature is a Important feature.

The textures you use on the models . Take a 2048 x 2048 Texture with 72 Dpi this is actually a rather low quality texture compared to a 600 Dpi texture. Comes to it that Poser is limited like other programs on the imported Texture size but not the Dpi . so you can get a extreme high quality texture that is allot smaller in dimensions that is still supported to be applied on your models or backgrounds.

Y-Phil posted at 6:42AM Wed, 15 September 2021 - #4427474

I'm getting more and more confused with all this. For me, a pixel is a pixel, and the DPI are related to the "device" that is going to show/print" it. If someone needs more details, depending on the "final device", then increase the number of pixels of the rendered picture.

you can't Increase the DPI expecting it to be of better quality keeping the actual dimensions of the Image. The Image Dimension will shrink into a tumb nail in a extreme case to keep the quality but the print quality will not get better on your A4 it will just not fill out the paper, or digitally fill your screen without having to Zoom in the high res Render, having again a quality loss.

Rhia474 posted at 2:01PM Wed, 15 September 2021 - #4427447

Look, if it was a feature, I wouldn't have been told this is known and will be addressed in a future release.

It is a bug. The bug is that the DPI value is being written incorrectly to the exported image. It should be fixed.

But that does not change the fact that rendering the same image with the same pixel resolution at different DPI settings will yield the same pixel data in the same time. If the pixel data is different -- as shown in your two images -- something else is also going on. Two separate issues.

Cyogreem posted at 2:45PM Wed, 15 September 2021 - #4427476

Y-Phil posted at 6:42AM Wed, 15 September 2021 - #4427474

I'm getting more and more confused with all this. For me, a pixel is a pixel, and the DPI are related to the "device" that is going to show/print" it. If someone needs more details, depending on the "final device", then increase the number of pixels of the rendered picture.

you can't Increase the DPI expecting it to be of better quality keeping the actual dimensions of the Image. The Image Dimension will shrink into a tumb nail in a extreme case to keep the quality but the print quality will not get better on your A4 it will just not fill out the paper, or digitally fill your screen without having to Zoom in the high res Render, having again a quality loss.

The picture will shrink on a device that needs more pixels per surface unit, but the pixels itself won't be changed, it's only the way they are interprated and displayed/printed that will be influenced. thus if you need more pixels per surface unit on your output device (screen, printer, video projector or whatever), you will need more pixels, but increasing the DPI information will not be interprated as "Put more data in each pixel": no shrink effect, no expand effect on these data, only on their representation.

𝒫𝒽𝓎𝓁

(っ◔◡◔)っ

This does Not explain Rhia474's quality issue.
But this explains the Resolution Quality when 'Rendering for Print' (as opposed to Web)

There are Three different properties that will effect the PRINT Quality:

Pixel Dimension - the Area of the Image (Width & Height)
Document Size - the Size of the paper (print media)
**the Resolution - Dpi, Dots/pixels per inch (how many Dots/pixels to put on paper in each inch...limited by the Print Device)

As JoEtzold pointed out, if you do NOT let the image editor Resample the "Pixel Dimension" then you can change the Resolution by manually changing the "Document Size" or the "Resolution". This has No Effect on the Rendered "Pixel Dimension"

Therefore the Pixel Dimension becomes anchored.

These are snap shots of the Render I have that started this all:
**Inputted to Poser12 was 3300x2550 Pixel Dimension, 300 Dpi, which also in Poser showed Document size of 11x8.5

#1: As it opened in PhotoShop (Document Size changed but Pixel Dimension is proper)

#2: What happens if you change Resolution (Dpi,pixels per inch) it Changes the Pixel Dimension - THIS NO GOOD, BAD QUALITY PRINT

#3: Just Notice on This one how Unchecking "Resample" now Disables the Pixel Dimensions section.

#4: Now I can change either the Document Size or the Resolution values and manipulate to the Printer 'How many Dots/Pixels to print per inch' - This is GOOD. (I think)
I now have the Same Dimension of Pixels that Poser rendered, I just tell the Print Device how to view it.

Again, comparing #1 and #2:

I want 300dpi in a 3300x2550 Dimension of Pixels, NOT 13749x10624 Dimension.
And I want it on a sheet of paper 11x8.5 not 45.8x35.4

So basically I think Poser is kinda getting it right, only issue is that the saved File has to have it's Document Print Properties corrected (BEFORE sending to Print) for the target you were telling Poser....

Sorry to all that I brought this up.
As stated I have worked in the Print Industry for three decades and seen copier/printers go from mere B&W devices to full on Print Shops.
Only reason this is even an issue would be for someone who uses Poser for Print and this little quirk will only effect one's Print Workflow.

Example: High End printers such as I maintained, supported, and then eventually became the trainer for are very sophisticated today.
Lets say I work for a company that prints a magazine (catalog, whatever). Printers today you could have one department that writes the Text for each page into a database, the art department creates the images that will go onto these pages within the text.
Lets say I have been tasked to Render 20 images at 3x2.5 that will then be Batch Printed into a TEMPLATE that the other department has set up and uploaded to the printer.

Mind you, some of these printers you might find in an office, other in a print shop. One such printer at Xerox we called "the School Buss" because end to end it was litteraly the length of a school buss.

Now I have spent the time to set up and render my 20 images telling Poser what "size" (Including Document Size) they are to be. In this sample case I have no need for postwork, I will be sending them in what is called Batch Print to be merged to the Template the other depart has set up already on the printer.

I finish, send the images, hit the Print button for (lets say) 1,000 sets. I go to break, lunch, whatever and come back to grab the finished production.....and OOPS! One of two outcomes:

A) Nothing is done, the printer has an Error "Image(s) do not fit" and it is waiting for a response!
B) "OMG! WHAT HAPPENED"- only partial images are in the defined areas of the pages.

Now let me point out another saying in the printing industry: "Printer Ink per ounce cost more then Caviar" (in business not to mention paper and time)

Now of course in a Proper work environment: I should have Proofed the job before hitting Print and walking away.
This is an extreme example and IF "A" or "B" happened, it would be on ME. However, the fault is still Poser's....DARN YOU POSER, now I need to add an Extra Step to my work flow, that means Extra Time.

But again, for most in this forum this is crazy and meaningless. Why is this guy complaining? How does this effect me? I only print for Web or hobby, I always postwork and then save out (at which time YOU assign the file's properties), "This whole thread is a waste of my time, get over it".
True, if everyone was you.

Yes this is a minor quirk of Poser to not Output what was Input, but hey, I am the Master so do as I say! If I input XYZ then I do not want ZYX out.
Besides, I am igohigh, the guy who many are "afraid to say my screen name" (because they think it means something differnt then skydiving) and the one who always finds 'trouble' to bring up (hey, I spent my life as Paid to "find trouble" and find how to fix or work around it). Even my employers who 'pay me to find trouble and fix it' complained that "You always find trouble"....uh ya, that is what a Technician does:
-Find problem
-Define problem
-Devise or Seek solution (if beyond my ability)
-Test solution
-Implement solution
-Verify final fix

Now, that all said; I wonder why is Rhia474 getting what they are getting?

And why is it different from one version of Poser from the other? I had nothoing of this sort when I was in earlier versions. I said I want 300 dpi, I defined height and width, I got the right output. People here tell me all sort of technical explanations, but when I tried to show above is that it does not matter what I tell Poser 12 about dpi, height and width, it will always give me 72 dpi, regardless of dimensions. ANd it is confirmed to exist.

Not all of us can afford Photoshop, not all of us can do postwork processing. I certainly can't. (and please don't tell me GIMP is free, if y'all only bring up Photoshop as an example. I have it. I use it when I need to. It is not relevant to a bug that exists.)

And yes, I'm apparently the blunt, grumpy librarian.

igohigh posted at 12:29 AM Fri, 17 September 2021 - #4427596

"You always find trouble"....uh ya, that is what a Technician does

I like that mindset! These people shouldn't be seen as the boring character, they move things forward!

EVargas.Art

I agree. Poke it until it's improved!

To shorten the trouble I had a look into JPG header description. It is like with nearly most image file formats that in the header only the pixel width and the pixel height is defined/saved/stored. So no DPI or paper scale description. Even for what cause it's to the user to define there to output and not job of the image.

I have checked with lots of my Poser images (version 7, 8, 10) and camera images in some of the up to here often named image tools. Every time I open a picture I get 72 DPI even may be 96 DPI and have to set the print output scale thus adapting the DPI. This is normal behavior of most image programs cause running on the monitor which is using 72 or 96 DPI. So for me Poser is behaving normally and I don't know there it should store a DPI value in the image file. Ok, may be in EXIF data if storing such stuff. But EXIF data are not relevant for printer steering.

If you want to know more about JPG file header have a look here https://www.file-recovery.com/jpg-signature-format.htm

Or if you want to have a look to the header of one of your images try this https://cyber.meme.tips/jpdump/# there you get listed whats in your files header.

Rhia474: I am not sure as late I do not have much time for rendering, BUT since P12 release I have heard tidbits about the render engines so I took it that is why they say opening older scenes you have to do some tweaking of materials...don't know about going backwards as I have not explored.
Now, for your image - when you set the Dimensions and the Dpi, in your Image Editor (any one, I don't know why JoEtzold gets a different reading in PhotoImpact as I do not, ALL my editors read all files as they are saved) - now, for yours; is the Pixel Dimension (height and width) still the same values as you input in Poser?

In my last samples above: Note how #1 and #4 have the Same 'Pixel Dimension' (the top values). This is Size in digital space. The 'Document Size' and 'Dpi' will be the Resolution within the Print Space on a sheet of paper.

For my Printing I first created a Blank picture in PhotoShop, then I set my desired Resolution and Document Size and took note of the Pixel Dimension as my Image Editor calculated it - (with Resampling ON) if I change the Dpi it changes the Pixel Dimensions.
Not sure if perhaps this the "correct" way to go but to my I was Reverse Engineering so I could tell Poser what I wanted.

Now for yours, they blurry, I am guessing it may be a Render Engine issue? One Engine rendering your textures different then the other?? Not being a Poser engineer nor having the files to recreate and experiment....I am only guessing.
But check your Render in the Image Editor, see if the Pixel Dimension is as you input into Poser.

@JoEtzold; I don't know why your Image Editors do what they do. All mine (both paid and free) will always open any image up in what ever it was saved in even when I take it into a different editor - I often take my Photos as well as Renders into multiple editors to take advantage of what each has to offer.
Example: I generally begin with a photo in PhotoShop, from there I also have access to Topaz Labs filters, then I may save it and open it in On1 and do further editing, then perhaps into Affinity Photo, then back into PhotoShop - at ALL Times if it is a 180dpi photo it remains 180dpi when I reopen it. If it is a 300dpi it remains 300dpi
In ALL my Image Editing I NEVER reduce to 72dpi until the LAST step and only if I am posting to the Web. If I intend to Print it REMAINS at (generally) 200-300dpi whichever I DECIDE to do with it.

Now, there are few exceptions such as On1, that one likes to Upscale and often to an image property that I have to reduce or flatten to further work with in PhotoShop.
But still I have NO Image Program that will alter my Document Settings (page size nor Resolution) when going from one to the other.

Here are four Photos, all JPGs, all taken from Different devices, the top left being a still shot snapped from my Cannon video recorder, others from my camera, my wife's camera, and my Cannon camera.
Each device takes photos (JPG) with their manufactured Size and Resolution determined by the makers.
ALL of these four photos I ONLY OPENED in Photoshop - NO change was made to any of them - I just opened the photo and pulled up the Size via the Edit tab at the top, made NO CHANGES to ANY VALUES.
Note how each photo reports the JPG's file size.....NONE where changed from what the Camera device saved the file in.

The "File Properties" is what a printing device is going to read for output. Like the old saying "Garbage In, Garbage Out", one needs to tell the device How to print it, therein is the Document Size portion of the file's Property tag.
If I tell any editor to Save this file in xxxx and next time I open it, it reads cccc - that is a problem.

And once again - I can open All these images in All my editors and All will read the Same "Properties" for each photo/image/render/gif/png/Tiff....and so forth and so on.

Now, any Changing of these values will effect the Quality of the print. As none of these are set for printing to 8x6 or 9x10 or 11x8.5 or even some large Poster Size, the Pixels will be changed: squished (removed) or stretched (spread out and added). That technically is where the "Resample" comes in, the editor will attempt to give you a smooth pixel shift by "sampling" neighbor pixels to re-draw the resized image.
This is why in the issue of my OP I was attempting to make Poser render me the image EXACTLY the size and dimension and resolution I wanted so there would be No Resizing before sending to the final print process and therefor print out the render in all of Poser's glorious quality.

However, your pointing out the Resample function, for my case, as been the solution. The question still remains why Poser wants to Change my "Document" size that Input in Properties and makes me have to go into an Image Editor and Change it back to what I programed Poser to do Before I send to the Printer.

STOP!

The software in your last post says nothing about DPI! All I see is "pixels/inch", PPI!

PPI vs DPI: What’s the Difference and Why It Matters to Photographers

@JoEtzold; and one more thing to point out to you - my OP, I am not working with JPG, my output from Poser is PNG
We have only brought JPG into the topic as "Document Size" comparison as cameras output JPG or RAW in higher end camera.
I work with PNG or PSD format (sometime TIFF) to keep the higher resolution that is lost when compressing into JPG.
So again: Document Size (media size & Dpi) are the print quality of any given Pixel Dimension.
I bring this up as I was looking at your referred to links - they do not seem to address the Print Resolution of a given JPG.
For Document Size & Resolution it does not matter the Format of the Image: If I have a 180dpi 4x5 Document Property set on an image, I can save it as PNG, TIFF, PSD, or JPG and it will open in any other Image Editor as THAT size and and dimension. (Except for Poser, for Poser will calculate it back down to Dpi of 72 and what ever document size that correlates to the given Pixel Dimension.....hence the "oh bother")

Now I'm upset cause the renderosity software has eaten up again a fine answer post of me. It's the second time and I have no interest in redoing that every time twice.

And also this complete thread is much more than a academic excourse for a truely simple and trivial thing and much more than I have ever thought about DPI and that stuff my whole life long.

And no fear about my programs. They are all fine may be a bit old the one or other but fully fit on work. But I have none changed in DPI setting. No need for that and so they all start with 72 DPI by default. As also the Canon EOS 2000D there no setting is given to change the standard 72 DPI. I just had a look into the official handbook. And why should I fiddle with DPI. As far as the original pixel size keeps untouched you can work and manipulate as much as you want in e.g. Photoshop. First at the end you need to decide what and where to output and then DPI together with paper size is important.

So for me this is working absolutely perfect and I have no need for printing lots of different pictures automatical. B.t.w. most image formats are not storing DPI as original part of their specification but in between in the so called metadata (e.g. EXIF) and from there they can be read again as far as a program is capable using such metadata. For example even Photoshop CS2015 is killing those metadata from a file if you use "save as ... " and no DPI is anymore. (have a look to the Photoshop forums at Adobe)

adp001 posted at 3:08 PM Fri, 17 September 2021 - #4427633

STOP!
The software in your last post says nothing about DPI! All I see is "pixels/inch", PPI!
PPI vs DPI: What’s the Difference and Why It Matters to Photographers

Okay, PPI if you wish - just keep in mind that Printers do not print "pixels", Printers print 'dots'; ie; the value is labeled "Resolution". Therefore in the Document size the terms PPI and Dpi are interchangeable.
My issue when I posted was that Poser is not writing OUT what the operator writes IN.
However, despite whatever issues JoEtzold may have about the description; Poser's 'Export Image' function is not keeping true to the inputs it is given.

I am done with this thread, as JoEtzold has said; he is not interested in this and no intention of printing out lots of different pictures automatical - if this is not something you use Poser for then why get upset because someone else might.
I don't print Comic books but I will not get "upset" if someone who does opens a conversation about doing so with Poser.

In closing; my solution has been found in JoEtzold's pointing out the "Resample" function of post editor software. All the rest of the bickering here is mute and the "trivials of DPi" would indeed be a topic for the 2D software threads.
(**bottom line: Poser not fully saving out what was fed in, one extra step in a 'print' workflow, no big deal....for me anyway)

igohigh posted at 1:52 PM Tue, 21 September 2021 - #4427811

My issue when I posted was that Poser is not writing OUT what the operator writes IN.

Thats not completely true. Poser is writing out whats his primary task. A correct rendered image in wished pixel dimensions. And up to version 11 it is also writing out eventually given DPI according with paper size in inch or cm or pixel. on your choice. And this last secondary task seems broken in version 12. I can't proof cause I'm waiting to buy Poser 12 until better solution for use of older python scripts is given and most bugs are solved. (Have never installed any Poser version until min. third service pack was out.) I have all that said just checked with test renders in Poser 2014 Pro (thats the version before 11 and 12 so now called 10).

And b.t.w. as I said before mostly all image formats are not writing DPI and such stuff in their original header specification only pixel dimensions. And this is for JPG, PNG and also PSD the same. DPI as also paper sizes if available are stored in the metadata. And thats a problem cause this metadata are not a fully complete standard. There are some parts which are common and DPI and paper size are not in this. Everyone can add further data in that metadata. So on one hand it's not defined wether to write such data nor is it asured that a particular program can and do read them. In first line metadata was thought for information not for operation. That came later and as everytime if doing something not defined fully in the beginning it's a fine part for may be getting troubles.

I have never ever said something against printing lots of images as bulk automatical. I don't do so and I guess most of Poser users also not cause a main theme here around is everytime the reworking of the renders in image manipulation programs. And then it's only one step more to set the correct output size for the given pixel dimensions. And b.t.w. I was not upset about this thread I was upset about renderosity cause one again they puzzle on their internet design and its not bug free. I lost this way two posts and with marking all read doesn't come back to the top level above but have to navigate back.

@JoEtzold ; First let me thank you for pointing out that you are NOT using Poser 12 to support your argument that what we see in Poser 12 is not happening. That makes a whole lot of sense.

Now, I really did think I was going to need to spend this much time for I thought I had given enough information and samples BUT here it goes:

The scene is the SAME, very simple. Only thing I change is the RESOLUTION SIZE in Poser then without changing anything I open the render in Photoshop and take a look at the Document Size.

Now here is what Goes Into Poser 12 and what comes Out (forget about the "Resampling" for I am changing NOTHING)
***Note: Two Renders, Two different RESOLUTIONS asked for but BOTH come out as 72

Now here is Poser 11: Same scene, ONLY changing the RESOLUTION, I change Nothing when I open it in Photoshop.
***NOTE: Poser 11 gives me One 72 Resolution Image and One 300 Resolution image

As the Pixel Dimension are NOT changing, what this tells me is that Poser 12 is rendering at a MAX Resolution of 72 pixels/inch but Poser 11 is rendering the requested 300 pixels/inch ALL with the 640x480 .......or is Poser 11 lying and really only rending both at 72?

So; is ANY version of Poser actually Rendering at resolutions higher then 72 ?? Poser 11 claims that it is, but Poser 12 is saying it can't.

So I will just leave it at this final 'explanation' from the web:

igohigh posted at 7:28 PM Mon, 27 September 2021 - #4428207

So; is ANY version of Poser actually Rendering at resolutions higher then 72 ?? Poser 11 claims that it is, but Poser 12 is saying it can't.

For Poser 2014 Pro I can definitve say it's doing higher DPI than 72. It can be seen with the images contense, sharpness, etc. as also by the increasing render times and the size of the render buckets.

As far as I know Poser 12 is up to this moments not placed as final but as a so called early release. So don't know if and when it becomes final including a python scripts solution and up to that moment 2014 Pro or 11 are the friends.

@igohigh - you need to set the render size in either inches or cm for changing the dpi to have any effect.

Resolution when rendering is controlled by the total number of pixels in the image.

In the example screens you've posted, the image has the same resolution in both 11 & 12 - 640 x 480 pixels.

That number of pixels can be printed at either 8.888 x 6.666 inches at 72 dpi, or 2.133 x 1.6 inches at 300 dpi.

If you want to print at 8.888 x 6.666 inches at 300 dpi then you need to set that size in the render size dialog and let Poser figure out how many pixels are needed (it's 2666 x 2000, according to Photoshop).

So if you tell Poser what print size and resolution you need it will calculate the number of pixels needed to achieve that.

If you tell it how many pixels you want you'll have to sort the print size and resolution yourself.

DPI is not rendered, only pixels are rendered.

----------------------------------------

Not approved by Scarfolk Council. For more information please reread. Or visit my local shop.

Seems that poser 12 is clearly broken compared to all the previous versions when it comes to DPI. all previous versions work well and clearly render at the DPI setting not reducing it . You will note this when reducing an image rendered at 300-600 dpi in Poser 11 and reducing it for Web at 72 Dpi that it will loose quiet allot of quality and not be as sharp. Actually it is not the Idea having such an Option in Poser 12 expecting it to work and having to calculate a Increased size to achieve the effective DPI you want to end up with.

Seems Poser 12 will remain for some more years in Pre Release not even the Poser 11.1 SM to Bondware's 11.3 version has ever been finished before the support stopped it just has been dropped with a broken Python engine that needs to be run with a 3rd party fix ! Not a very serious marketing strategy.

Cyogreem posted at 8:08 PM Tue, 28 September 2021 - #4428258

Seems that poser 12 is clearly broken compared to all the previous versions when it comes to DPI. all previous versions work well and clearly render at the DPI setting not reducing it . You will note this when reducing an image rendered at 300-600 dpi in Poser 11 and reducing it for Web at 72 Dpi that it will loose quiet allot of quality and not be as sharp. Actually it is not the Idea having such an Option in Poser 12 expecting it to work and having to calculate a Increased size to achieve the effective DPI you want to end up with.
Seems Poser 12 will remain for some more years in Pre Release not even the Poser 11.1 SM to Bondware's 11.3 version has ever been finished before the support stopped it just has been dropped with a broken Python engine that needs to be run with a 3rd party fix ! Not a very serious marketing strategy.

Well at least you seem to see what I am getting at here.
My WHOLE intention here was to Render the Size and Resolution desired for printing so during Postwork I do not have to Enlarge or Reduce the image, thus loosing quality.
*****Lets Drop The "Dpi" as that seems to be confusing the Question - Both Poser and Photoshop show them as Resolution = px/n (pixels per inch)********
(that was my fault for that is the way us print people think "dpi" whereas computer people think in "px/in" - us hardware folk understand the translation but apparently some computer folk find it confusing)

@caisson; If you read back to the beginning - I had done exactly what you have said:
"So if you tell Poser what print size and resolution you need it will calculate the number of pixels needed to achieve that.

If you tell it how many pixels you want you'll have to sort the print size and resolution yourself."

I told Poser both; What Print Size I want and the number of Pixels" - I had this all worked out ahead of time at the Print End.
- As you can see in the Poser 11 example above (using the 300px/in) P11 did what I requested - there was no need to "sort the print and resolution myself" as P11 gave me two different px/in renders as I aksed it to.
However, Poser 12 ALWAYS changes the px/in (pixels per inch) to 72 no matter what I tell the Render Engine to do.

You said:
"In the example screens you've posted, the image has the same resolution in both 11 & 12 - 640 x 480 pixels."
TRUE, I did so for the whole sake of comparing what the two versions of Poser are doing to the Resolution.
BUT, look again - in both Poser 11 & 12 I made TWO EACH RENDERS; one at 72px/in and one at 300px/in

You said:
"That number of pixels can be printed at either 8.888 x 6.666 inches at 72 dpi, or 2.133 x 1.6 inches at 300 dpi."
Here is where you go off the target - the Target its to Print BOTH 72dpi and 300dpi at 8.88 x 6.666 inches - - my example above should be Two Renders from Each version of Poser. Each version of Poser should have rendered Both 72px/in AND 300px/in ALL at the same 0000 x 0000 size. Only Poser 11 seems to have done this for Poser 12 did Two renders at 72px/in
The 72px/in will be less quality then the 300px/in

So the question is:
Given a Render size of 640 x 480 and render it Twice each using a Different Resolution value (one 72px/in and one 300px/in)
That should give out Two different final renders of Two different Resolutions, right?
A) 640 x 480 at a low resolution of 72px/in
B) 640 x 480 at high resolution of 300px/in

According to my sample: Poser 11 does this but Poser 12 does not.
According to my sample: Poser 12 is rendering both at 72px/in as confirmed by Photoshop
According to my sample: Only Poser 11 is rendering two different resolutions of the same pixel dimension (640 x 480)

**** In Short ****
If I had a 10 inch x 10 inch section of my Monitor with say 3,000 x 3,000 pixels and I view it with 72 pixels per inch then I have 5,184 pixels of color information (resolution), but if I view it with 300 pixels per inch then I have 90,000 pixels of color information and therefore a much higher, clearer, less grainy image. - - DO NOT CHANGE THE 10 in x 10 in

Just a mnemonic as a quotation from the posts of a other user here I came across:

"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience!"

Might be a bit heavy and so not my style but going somewhat to the right direction by trend. :-)

igohigh posted at 5:47 PM Wed, 29 September 2021 - #4428280

>So the question is:
>Given a Render size of 640 x 480 and render it Twice each using a Different Resolution value (one 72px/in and one 300px/in)
>That should give out Two different final renders of Two different Resolutions, right?
>A) 640 x 480 at a low resolution of 72px/in
>B) 640 x 480 at high resolution of 300px/in
>
>According to my sample: Poser 11 does this but Poser 12 does not.
>According to my sample: Poser 12 is rendering both at 72px/in as confirmed by Photoshop
>According to my sample: Only Poser 11 is rendering two different resolutions of the same pixel dimension (640 x 480)

If you do these two renders in Poser 11 (640x480 at 72dpi and 640x480 at 300dpi), and then view them side by side scaled to display the same size on your screen, are they distinguishable in any way?

Yes they are , you will note the differences when zooming in the Image. 72 dpi will get useless when scaling 200 % 300 dpi up can be scaled up with ease 200% 300% without any quality loss.

same reason why 72 dpi is of no use for printing on paper as it is already a sort of zoom in, in most cases you will zoom your Image to fit the Paper. but you will note the same result on your screen when zooming. 72 dpi is for sure not ideal to enlarge a section of the Image, fact is also that when making a professional work you usually render a larger angle so that you later can cut out a section for a better presentation but still want to have a good quality if you need to scale up the Image to fit your preference after the cut.

so again yes the dpi is important as soon as you wish having some professional results and not just 72dpi renders for a quick web show on Instagram or Facebook. It is also to consider that some need a good dpi if they sell there works for prints . Artwork is not just a quick sample render that you place on the web to get a little attention in allot of cases it also needs a certain Image quality.

I always render at a minimum of 300 dpi up then I load the render in a Photo Program to adapt it, if I need it for web presentation I then reduce it to 92 or even 72 dpi but the original will always have a major quality that sure can be seen.

It comes to it that you will not be able to just change the dpi in Photoshop expecting to keep the same size increasing the dpi as the dpi is produced while rendering and can't be faked expecting to achieve a better quality in a Image application, so this would not make a better quality of your Image. true dpi are generated when rendering, the higher the dpi the smaller your render square will be.

You might want to check your render setting in poser 12. I just rendered these. One was Poser 12 set at 600dpi. It saved as 72. One is switching that image to 600 dpi and setting for the print size that it should have come out as. And one is rendered in Poser 11 and saved as 600dpi. I realize the texture isn't the highest quality to start with, but I can't see any change. Can you?

Available on Amazon for the Kindle E-Reader Monster of the North and The Shimmering Mage

Today I break my own personal record for the number of days for being alive.
Check out my store here or my free stuff here
I use Poser 13 and win 10

Cyogreem posted at 6:56 AM Fri, 1 October 2021 - #4428347

It comes to it that you will not be able to just change the dpi in Photoshop expecting to keep the same size increasing the dpi as the dpi is produced while rendering and can't be faked expecting to achieve a better quality in a Image application, so this would not make a better quality of your Image. true dpi are generated when rendering, the higher the dpi the smaller your render square will be.

THANK YOU Cyogreem!!! THANK YOU!
I had a feeling I was conversing with just web image posters but thought for sure some of the old professionals we used to converse with some years back were still around, some of those who render for comic books, some of those who render for editing into video (not just Instagram or YouTube posting). But it looks like most of them are either gone or stay lurking as I have these past many years.

@RedPhantom ; No, can not see much via your samples, however Cyogreem's example Do show the difference between a 72px/in and 600px/in very well and noticeably.
The primary issue that I have with Printing and not knowing ahead of time what Poser is doing is that when I print I am not printing to ordinary typing paper or even photo paper; my purpose is to print to a special paper (Pearl Matalic) that is expensive and gives the best print when the image is of high quality. Poor resolution will show more then would on everyday paper.

However, the angry one had shown a way to 'change the dpi without changing the paper size' in Photoshop (I have acknowledged this multiple times now). But as Cyogreem points out - 'Changing' values in an Image Editor does usually open up the can of worms of trying to "fake resolution". There are high end image apps for this but even then it is always a 'Best Effort' (however some of the new, expensive apps do pretty darn well).
So the question still remains: is Poser 12 actually Rendering anything other then 72px/in
When I find time to set up a good test to do an Extreme Zoom in on I will see.

@JoEtzold again, I will offer you again a thanks for pointing out "Resample" in the Image Editors....sorry if the rest was over your head and you are unable to 'see' yourself what we are discussing since you are not even using P12, But I will keep my further discussion of Poser 12 with those who are Actually using the program, thank you.

RedPhantom posted at 11:36 AM Fri, 1 October 2021 - #4428356

You might want to check your render setting in poser 12. I just rendered these. One was Poser 12 set at 600dpi. It saved as 72. One is switching that image to 600 dpi and setting for the print size that it should have come out as. And one is rendered in Poser 11 and saved as 600dpi. I realize the texture isn't the highest quality to start with, but I can't see any change. Can you?

These are the original renders, first is at 72 dpi second is 600 dpi original size render settings remain the same on both except the dpi settings I guess if your textures have 72 dpi it might not work but if you are using high quality textures it might affect if they get reduced , other method would be to print and then scan at this point you sure will see the difference, so even if one gets no difference like in your case it should not be an excuse not to fix the issues in Poser 12 , else they shall just remove the option this way there will not be any questions about it if they can't fix the problem.

I am not sure if it still works after uploading the images but if it does you can save them and see by your self what happens when you scale them next to each other.

Edit: Nop uploading the Images changed the DPI to 96 so again a quality loss

Actually it is simple Dpi is probably the digital simulation of a film. Like the quality of negative on how many light dots it will have, in combination with the shutter opening that throws light dots it could be compared with your Pixel size. the smaller the shutter the sharper your Image ( Negative ) the more small dots good for depth focus if you have something right in front of your camera. Shutter open will only keep your focus sharp and background blurry equals large light dots. So in a way all this is to be able to digitalize mechanic shots! The Function of Printing is similar , Obviously ! Just that you need these Digital settings to get the right amounts of sharp dots for your Printing if you want a good quality Picture. If you google you will see what amount of DPI it will need to have a negative that can be enlarged to a poster without any loss.

Ever been in a Movie theater ? you need to imagine a little square image that has such a high compression that the image projected on the huge screen remains totally sharp.

I do not believe that Dpi has been developed just as a fun setting that keeps your Images always the same no matter how high you set it up :) and that just because Poser 12 can't handle it anymore that all the descriptions in the net about dpi are false statements .

I don't know what you are doing so I tested it myself. Here's a 640x480 72dpi image rendered in Poser 11 using Firefly.

Here's the same image rendered at 300dpi in Poser 11. All render settings the same, except the DPI setting.

The two images are nearly pixel-for-pixel identical.

And to be clear, here is the setting I changed:

When you rendered your two images, did you keep the width and height the same, in pixels? If you are rendering them at different pixel dimensions, there will obviously be a quality difference. But at the same pixel dimensions, there is not.

If you have changed the width and height units to something other than pixels, then when you change the "Resolution" settings to a different number of pixels per inch, you will get output with different pixel dimensions.

It is a real time scan simulation to show what will happen if your Images are used for Professional works the render above have been made just by changing the Pix/In amount in Poser nothing else . Then a Print scan simulation as it is clear your screen of your standard Monitor will only display 72 or 96 Dpi but a Image for Print for example needs at least 300 dpi. every saved Image in Poser 12 if used for Printing needs to be adapted manually this is fact.

But sure you can take a Mathematical Template to recalculate the effective dimensions for your Print that will have again an outcome of 72 dpi then using Gimp or Photoshop to change your DPI in your work. If you get a assignment for a work that gets Payed for Printing purposes you sure need to deliver what has been requested so either you recalculate or just have a working dpi setting in the app you are working with not just one that lets you think that you have it .

I Agree that it is complicated if you are not using your renders for Printing assignments or for a Gallery expo and because of this it might be easier if the Poser staff just removes this setting in Poser 12 just like in Blender that is limited to 72 - 96 dpi , ok Poser will be limited to 72 dpi . and then just recalculate what you need for Printing!

so what happens in your tests is just that you have a Monitor that will limit your works to 72 - 96 dpi and clearly not capable to show what would be if it were 300 dpi or higher on a Print by reducing again your 300 dpi image to 72-96 dpi as your Monitor is limited to these resolution but not the Paper or the film.

I'm so sorry but the settings in poser and shown by phtoshop from Igohigh some posts back and the arguments from Cyogeem just above are completely rubbish. As long as you set a 640 x 480 pixels render area its completely equal what DPI you set. You get everytime a 640 x 480 pixels output. DPI first comes into play if you want to output these pixels to paper or what else which is measured in inches or cm or else.

You seems to simple to understand that DPI or PPI is nothing absolute or ownstanding. It is only the bridge or relation between square pixels on one hand and a in real values measured paper or something else. Nothing more and nothing less.

If you want to understand that truely I suggest that you search in photographing forums for DPI and you find lots like you but also real professionell photographers which are declaring what is declared here around in several aspects.

#igohigh: I'm truely astonished about what you have written abaout printer people opposite computer people. You should remember that your beloved printers are able to do high quality output first since those computer people gave them a lot of electronic life. And I'm truely mostly astonished about your discussion cause I was absolutely in the opinion that a printing instructor should knows all about these above stuff to be good in his profession. Ok, sometime I can lay wrong ... I see. So be happy with your opinions further on ... if correct or not ...

But just for some others may be interested and not such simple as you: I'm since 40 years in that hobby business first with photografics and then also with rendering since their first moments. And that all with poster sizes as also with small handhelds on monitors, simple papers, photographic papers and seeing throug materials. So never again come around with your personel completely unproofen assumptions ...

JoEtzold posted at 12:57 PM Sat, 2 October 2021 - #4428428

I'm so sorry but the settings in poser and shown by phtoshop from Igohigh some posts back and the arguments from Cyogeem just above are completely rubbish. As long as you set a 640 x 480 pixels render area its completely equal what DPI you set. You get everytime a 640 x 480 pixels output. DPI first comes into play if you want to output these pixels to paper or what else which is measured in inches or cm or else.
You seems to simple to understand that DPI or PPI is nothing absolute or ownstanding. It is only the bridge or relation between square pixels on one hand and a in real values measured paper or something else. Nothing more and nothing less.
If you want to understand that truely I suggest that you search in photographing forums for DPI and you find lots like you but also real professionell photographers which are declaring what is declared here around in several aspects.
#igohigh: I'm truely astonished about what you have written abaout printer people opposite computer people. You should remember that your beloved printers are able to do high quality output first since those computer people gave them a lot of electronic life. And I'm truely mostly astonished about your discussion cause I was absolutely in the opinion that a printing instructor should knows all about these above stuff to be good in his profession. Ok, sometime I can lay wrong ... I see. So be happy with your opinions further on ... if correct or not ...
But just for some others may be interested and not such simple as you: I'm since 40 years in that hobby business first with photografics and then also with rendering since their first moments. And that all with poster sizes as also with small handhelds on monitors, simple papers, photographic papers and seeing throug materials. So never again come around with your personel completely unproofen assumptions ...

No Rubbish ! If you read correctly we are talking about Printing and not about DPI that could be seen on a monitor as the monitor is in first hand is set to 72-96 Dpi but this has ben mentioned several times ( It has nothing to do with web design ) The Dpi output is what you need to get a sharp Print output . but sure you can go ahead and render your Images and start printing them in high quality using 72 dpi as long as you just do the Newspaper flyers for the Naber Hood.

Why does in here always things end up with excuses that there not necessary if they fail in Poser ? Guess it makes one feel better with some errors being able to live with them. But this way Poser will never be Final !

Poser renders pixels. Graphics files like jpg and png store pixels. The amount of detail in an image is determined solely by those pixels.

DPI and print size determine scaling for printing. Nothing more, nothing less. For a given print size e.g. in inches, a higher DPI will give you more detail, but it does it by creating an image with a larger number of pixels. If you want an image that will print 8x10", a 72dpi image will have a pixel dimension of 576x720, and a 300dpi image will have a pixel dimension of 2400x3000. That 300dpi image will absolutely have more detail but it has that detail because there are more pixels.

If the number of pixels is correct, you can trivially change the DPI setting with no loss of detail -- by changing the print size while keeping the pixel dimensions the same. What you can't do is increase the DPI setting while keeping the print size the same, because that would require getting more pixels which means creating information that isn't there.

All that said, there is clearly a bug in Poser 12, that causes it to incorrectly denote the DPI setting in the exported file. And that should be fixed. If you've changed the units in the render dimensions window, it may be especially bad because you won't see that the pixel dimensions are wrong. The workaround until it is fixed is to set the pixel dimensions correctly for your requirements.

Bug report submitted - pix/in setting not being saved with image file. 'Tis a very minor bug - if you set the physical size and resolution it will render the exact pixels required; it's just that pix/in is always set to 72dpi in the exported file. (I set a render size of 6x4" at 300pix/in which is 1800x1200 pixels, but in Photoshop the file is 72pix/in so the dimensions are 25x16.667" - still 1800x1200 pixels and easy enough to change, but that setting should carry over as it used to).

So to agree with and back up JoEtzoid and ChromeStar, that resolution setting has nothing to do with rendering. A pixel is just an RGB number, so pix/in is meaningless UNLESS you specify a physical size.

In Poser you EITHER set a physical size and resolution in the render dimensions dialog OR you set the number of pixels.

If you set the number of pixels e.g. 640x480 and then change the pix/in value it will be ignored UNLESS you change dimensions from pixels to inches or cm.

----------------------------------------

Not approved by Scarfolk Council. For more information please reread. Or visit my local shop.

@ChromeStar
You wrote: "When you rendered your two images, did you keep the width and height the same, in pixels?"

Answer: Yes. In ALL examples I have done here the Pixel width and height were NEVER changed.

@Cyogreem
Spot on, everything you have said.

@JoEtzold
I have already, multiple times, acknowledged your pointing out "Resampling" function in the Image Editors.
The rest of your rant - perhaps if you actually USED Poser 12 you may be able to see what Cyogrem and I are seeing.

@ChromeStar
You wrote: "Poser renders pixels."
CORRECT
You wrote: "Graphics files like jpg and png store pixels. The amount of detail in an image is determined solely by those pixels."

True, but a little more complicated then that. JPG is a highly compressed image file where files such as PNG, PSD, TIF, RAW (well, we will leave that one out...) all have ability to hold much more data and are therefor higher resolution (and larger files).

....I think back years ago when some creators where posting their textures in BMP format; HUGE files. Back then I had a tiny Windows 98 computer, I once mentioned that I was converting them to JPG due to storage size and some where AGHAST that I would do such a thing for they said the JPGs would give me much lower resolution and therefor poorer renders....this is TRUE, but back then I was only rendering for 'pretty pictures on the Internet' not for printing.

You wrote: "If the number of pixels is correct, you can trivially change the DPI setting with no loss of detail -- by changing the print size while keeping the pixel dimensions the same"

True! However as JoEtzold pointed out - be sure to Uncheck the "Resampling" box in the Image Editor (checked by default in all of mine) or it will change the Pixel width and height. By unchecking the "Resampling" (as JoEtzold pointed out) you can tell the printer which Dpi to print out said Pixel Dimension.

@caisson
Yes, that pretty much clears it all up.
True, it is a minor bug - once you know about it AND if 'print' quality is not the final output target, otherwise most Poser users will never know the difference or that it even exists.

@ Everyone:
I think this issue is warped up for now. A 'minor bug' has been found, it only effects a small number of Poser users but it is not a function or use killer by any means.

End Result (ONLY for those who print for quality) - Determine your Print Size in "Pixel Dimensions" then in the Image Editor be sure to UnCheck "Resample" (like JoEtzold pointed out) so it will Not change your "Pixel Dimensions" and then enter your Dpi into the Document settings - hit Print
(well, only hit "print" once you have set all your other particular 'Printing Preferences' and 'color management' settings and your desired 'printer profile' from your libraries...THEN hit print - but NONE of these are Poser setting issues)

Forum: Poser 12

Subject: Render Dpi vs Pixle?