HI Im interested in the size people render in with poser. Im aware that PAL DV is 720x576 which looks ok on TV. What are the preferences of the Poser community here? Cheers -LW

I usually render at 640x640 or 800x800 when I'm just checking how things look. When I'm ready to do my final render(ings), I do it (them) at 3000x3000. I like having room to work with when I do my post work.

320x320 for my web animations, 640x640 for background images...

1600 by whatever for postwork then shrink them in half to post anywhere.

About 1600 x 1600, depending on aspect ratio on that specific picture. I then shrink them to about 800 x 800 after postwork.

2000 x whatever usually, or 3000 x something if I need to postwork some specific details.

I don't render in Poser, but in other apps I usually render at 800x600 and then size it down to 640x480 to make it fit the console. (Gotta have room for the inventory bar and the navigation controls and stuff).

1600x1200 for still images (to be reduced to 800x600 after postwork) Typically 320x240 for video; occasionally 640x480 if my system feels up to it

3300x 2325. To print out 300 DPI at A4 size. Or 2048x1536 if it is to match a digital photo background for compositing.

1200x1200 for test renders, 3000x3000 for postwork. :] FishNose

Maybe this is a dumb question, but I don't know better :-) What is the advantage to render in say 3000x3000, and then scale it down to 800x600? Why just not render the pic in 800x600 the first time?

Hi Djuke. Speaking personally I render large to print them off. I would only reduce the size to post onto a gallery, just for bandwidths sake. Rendering large and scaling down helps with things like sharpening the picture. It is easier to add detail to a larger picture and some of that detail still remains when you reduce it. Your example of 3000x3000 reduced to 800x600 is a bit excessive though, most examples above only reduce a small amount. As an example try reducing a digital photo, you will be suprised just how small it can go and still be identifiable.

I render larger and scale down to gain some additional antialiasing. Poser's antialiasing isn't strong enough for my tastes.

I'm with you Little Dragon - it's amazing how much cleaner images look after that. Hope that P5 has adjustable AA for it's new rendering engine! Dave

I start get the picture now. Thank you very much to all for you input.

I do most of my final renderings in 1000x1200 or somewhere close to it. Haven't really tried to render it really big and size it down, though I think I will try that.

It's also a lot easier to postwork a larger picture. The postwork isn't as noticable after shrinking in my opinion.

Rendered at least 2,400 x 1,600 in Bryce or C4D for book cover print. I wonder how big it needs if we need to rpint for outdoor big canvas AD ? like 1 store height ? And how much is enough for normal TV ersolution, do we have to comply with NTSC, PAL or Web ?

at least 2800x2800, 100DPI. I do a lot of postwork, and it's a hell of a lot easier to work huge and shrink than it is to work small. Then I shrink to 72 DPI (for screen resolution), sharpen, then shrink to gallery posting size. But I save a copy of my original piece, in case I ever get around to making a portfolio of my work.

poser pro. The stuff Ive been doing for PAL TV is at 720x576 -LW

ok..another question...do many of you use 720x576 for TV resolution. WOuld anyone be interested in footage at 720x576 DV quality they could use in animations? -LW

For those who aren't aware, an ideal ratio for a "landscape" rectangular orientation is 4:3, the ratio of most computer monitors (no matter what their resolution or size.) IOW monitors displaying at 1024x786 and those displaying at 800x600 both have the same ratio. This might sound very basic or tangental, but it helps to become familiar with how the 4:3 ratio translates at different sizes when planning your test renders vs. final pictures. Shrinking an image's size isn't the same thing as anti-aliasing, it just has a similar perceptual effect. I used to overdo it: I'd render at 3Kx3K when the finished product was 800x600. At that large of a difference, much of the postwork I did was unnecessary (e.g. guassian blur on edges.) Obviously those working in high-quality print and TV media will want larger resolutions, but for computer-only use it seems like rendering at merely two times the size you intend the finished product to be is fine.

I suspect that rendering large and shrinking has illusory benefits compared to the extra time required for the render. I find no difficulty in rendering, postworking and publishing at 800x600. Larger resolutions are only really important if you want to print hard copies.