Illustrator :: High Raster Effect Resolution In Large Document Makes Effect Disappear
Feb 18, 2013
I'm making some graphics to be printed on a car. I have some lines with outer glow on them, but Illustrator won't render these unless I use 72DPI in raster effects reslution. I would like to go higher, but it won't give me anything. Guessing it's to heavy for Illustrator maybe? Is there anything I can do about this? I'm making my graphics in 1:1 scale, but I do it in a lower scale since it's just vector art anyway, however how would that effect my glow? Since it's a raster effect.
When applying filters such as accented edges, ink outline, etc to a medium sized image (1024x768 or 1280x853) produce some pretty cool results.
However, when applying those same filters to larger images like files with a 5184x3456 resolution, the filters have little to no effect. I'm guessing this is because there are so many more pixels that altering each pixel has a less noticeable effect.
You can see an example here with the accented edges filter run over a smaller version of a picture I took, and then a larger one (that was then downsized to make it viewable): [URL]
The 1280x853 one looks pretty cool. On the larger 5184x3456 version the filter had almost no noticeable effect.
The problem is that I want the cool looking version like is seen in the 1280x853 version, but at a high enough resolution to print on a large canvas that is, say, 40' x 40' or so. Is it possible to get the bigger image to look like the smaller one without losing the resolution required to print it on a canvas that large? I've been trying to figure this out for weeks now...
Does the "high pass sharpening" subdue color saturation of the images? I was creating a photo collage type of art in InDesign. I also used Photoshop to sharpen and resize each individual images.
I used High Pass sharpening with Edge Masks. After readjusting the images in photoshop I saved them with new names and relinked the new file to the InDesign. When I relinked the new image, there was a noticeable degradation of color saturation. The images looked sharper but a lot more grayer or muddish. In photoshop, I didn't change the color space.
So I wondered if the High Pass filter alters the color saturation. Here is the link to my photoshop actions that I used to create the sharpening effect. what caused the color shift in my file
I have created a flier in Illistrator (CS6). I want to output a high res PDF, and went through the print window so I could customize it, rather than just 'save as PDF'. Now I can't find a way of converting the ps. file into the finished PDF product. Does distiller still exist? I don't have the acrobat suite and need this output swiftly.
I was designing a Business Card using Illustrator and after finish when I was trying to save the project like an .eps with High Resolution the program didn't work and gave me an error "Stopped working" , I tried again and the same happened..
I am having trouble exporting a graphic in high-res format. The artwork I created is 2 inches by 2 inches in Illustrator, which is the size it will be when printed. When I export the file, I choose png and select '300 ppi,' leave anti-aliasing as 'none,' and use a transparent background. However, when I import the graphic into other applications (word, etc) the graphic is blurry and, in no way, high-res. I've tried exporting it as a PDF and get (from what I can tell with the naked eye) the same output. It might also be worth noting that I get a blurry output even inporting the .ai file, too. I've checked the Illustrator document resolution and it is set to maximum (300).
I am trying to figure out how a document is given that old look. I could not find any pictures, but the best way I can describe it is that a lot of documentary/info movies use this effect when quoting text from a report or something similar.
It has the appearance of being neatly torn at the top and bottom (I figured out how to do that step through the jagged effect) the text looks as if it is has been photocopied through a bad copier (I tried the photocopy effect, but it made everything too dark) as it has little tiny splotches here and there.
I am making a large back drop with a collage of photos of people. each image ranges from 8x12 to 16x 20....the photos I got from the professional photographers are showing up fine. My photos, taken with a 5D in Raw and exported at high res are showing up grainy...not sharp! I tried the raster settings like a friend suggested and set it to 150ppi or even 300ppi and no change..
I'm having extreme trouble creating a high-res 3d wrapped image. Here [URL] .... is the image.
You can see that the 3d rendering is only a few points, all smooth curves. My raster effects settings are high (CMYK 300PPI). The symbol image that I've wrapped is a 300PPI JPG file created from Photoshop, saved as a JPG, then placed and embedded in AI. Yet that text is atrocious. You can even clearly see the poor anti-aliasing colors that are going on. Several letters are not able to be read at all.
I've tried rasterizing the object using high res settings, anti-alias on and off. I've tried copy/pasting as a smart object into Photoshop. I've tried almost everything I can think of and I can't get this text to appear crisp on the bottle. It's a simple bottle, only 4 or so points and there are only 3 possible surfaces to map. I deliberately drew it that way to reduce any drag on the system. I'm on a 2009 iMac running Mountain Lion and 16GB RAM, i5.
This issue has plagued me honestly for months and I always end up doing a significant amount of retouching in Photoshop because of it. I'd like to create a crisp 3d wrap in AI if possible to hasten my workflow.
Maybe the answer is that AI isn't really suited and I need to look into a more dedicated 3d program.
I just got a fresh install of Illustrator CC and every time I place a raster image into my document, it appears dim or very light. When I go to export the image, the PNG file displays the image correctly.
I'm using Photoshop CS6, but I've confirmed that this happens on CS4, CS5 and CS5.1 too.
When I create a shape (say a simple triangle or such, using the various Shape tools), then apply a large (40px) Stroke Layer Effect to it, the corners of the stroke aren't smooth - they're stepped/jagged.
Note how the corners of the stroke aren't perfectly curved, but are made up of noticeable straight lines. The document you're seeing is being viewed at 100%, by the way. The stroke is set to Outside, and is 40px in size.
I'm aware of the new native strokes for vector shapes in CS6, and they don't have the problem, but in a certain project I need to combine both the native vector strokes and also the stroke layer effect, so I can't simply use the native strokes instead.
I'm also aware that I could use an Illustrator Smart Object with a pre-applied stroke, but that doesn't address whether this behaviour in Photoshop is broken or not.
It's been suggested to me that this problem arises because Photoshop applies the stroke layer effect to the rendered bitmap of the layer, not to the vector shape itself, and that's why the problem has persisted for several versions of CS.
I am playing with this at the minute but thought I would upload an image I am having trouble with. Learned 'flattening' with effects on top of other images - my problem this time is that we need a ghosted part of an image - my boss has done a 'glow' rectangle but i cannot 'flatten' it as it is sitting on top of a vector image!
I am going to try and split the vector image and fill it with a fountain fill but unsure if this can be done.
Artwork is done at 5x7in, i want to export this as a PNG for print purposes however the more i increase the ppi the bigger the pixel size. I want to export it at a high resolution but keep the pixel size to 500x700.
Is this possible?
Currently to achieve the 500x700 pixel size i change the ppi to 104, if i switch off anti alias then its fine for straight lines and shapes, however if i have a line or shape at an angle it gives these shapes a jagged edge!
OK, I'm creating a tradeshow graphic for a client. I designed the whole thing in Illlustrator CS6. But for the proof, I used a low res image of the sky (before we purchased it). Everyone was happy. It was a low-res RGB image imported into Illustrator, then the whole thing was exported as a pdf.
Once they approved it, I purchased the high res image. RGB. Same image... just high res. I popped it into the Illustrator file and exported it in exactly the same way. But now, the image looks much more purple. The low res pdf showed it as much brighter, lighter blue.
My client prefers the lighter blue. When I look at the two images in Photoshop, they look the same (in terms of color). should I be worred? Why is there such a color difference?
When I open a high resolution image in Ai they look somewhat distorted and choppy. They are jpeg files that I am placing in order to envelope distort onto a mesh. For some reason any bitmap image I open with Ai looks like this. However, when I open the same image with Acrobat Pro or Ps the image looks perfect. Images are RGB in both apps.
Image in Ps or Acrobat Image in Illustrator
There most be something in Illustrator that is causing this. Images are being embedded and cannot be linked since they need to be distorted. I am runnung CS6 on Intel iMac Maveriks.
I created a template and placed it in the Graphic Styles folder. When I use the New command and select the new template from Graphic Styles, the Guide layer disappears. When I double click the template to open it the guides are there. Why is the guide layer getting stripped out when I use the New command? I want to avoid opening from template everytime.
The weird thing is that I had a template that was opening with guides until I made some changes to it. Now it doesn't work either.
I'm trying to create a high resolution version of a low resolution texture used in a game. I've found a pattern that I think is acceptable, from a real image.Now the question is this: how can I colorize the large image to that it is as resemblant as possible to the original one? I've tryed a simple colorize, but the result is not so good...