Is it possible that you could reduce the minimum size required for uploading a layout? Pretty please?
Right now it's set to 700x700, but most sites require 600x600. I just think it would make it easier if you went by that standard (600x600), rather than having to remember what sites require different sizes when shrinking your layout for the web.
Hi Lizanne, thanks for pointing out your concern. We definitely want to make uploading layouts easy for everyone concerned. That being said, I'm a bit concerned about image resolution: I already reduced the requirement once from 800x800 to 700x700 (someone else said that 700 x 700 is the norm) and 600x600 is really quite low. Especially as monitor resolutions keep going up, we want the layouts in the gallery to keep looking nice
.
We'll definitely consider this, but I'd like to get more input before reducing the resolution requirements further...
Thanks for considering this. In the meantime, I resized my 600x600 layouts to 700x700 - hoping no loss of quality for doing this. I wanted to put all the layouts I've made in one place, and I'd never found a place I truly considered my digital scrapbooking "home" until now. Thanks so much for Pixelscrapper!
I'm no expert by any means but I've been uploading digi layouts for about 4 years off and on now to various websites. I've always known the standard to be 600x600. I, too... just thought I would be upsizing mine to upload them here. It would be nice to have them the same size as other sites, but it does make sense why you wouldn't want them too small either as monitors grow in size over time. However, I'm thinking a 600x600 at 72 and/or 96 ppi for most monitor/web resolutions would be at least 6"x6" or more, not huge but still a moderate size.
I was the one who pointed out the 700x700. In the past, it used to be 600x600 for every gallery, but some of the major stores and open galleries have made updates to their sites this past year, and now it's possible to upload 700x700 if you want to, even though they accept 600x600. It took me a while to make the change and do the 700x700, esp. because my old computer's screen wasn't big enough to allow me to view the whole image when it was bigger than 600x600 (I had to scroll up and down) which to me was definitely a loss of quality and quite annoying (never being able to see the full layout). But once I switched out my computer, I've been able view 700x700, and that's when I started saving them in that size. And every gallery I upload to accepts this size now, though I use a photoshop action someone created and shared in one of the other digiscrap communities that saves my images in both 700 & 600 because some people still prefer 600.
And Jordan, if I may point out: I have a high resolution screen (retina, which at the moment is the most advanced high resolution solution there is, as far as I know). And quite honestly, most of the layouts I've seen in this community turn out quite blurry. Even my own are a little more blurry in this gallery than in any of the other galleries, and (since I'm someone who actually cares about crisp high qualitly display of layouts) I've seen some very crisp, high quality images in the other galleries who allow 600 sizes, so I kind of feel like it has more to do with how people save their images than with whether it's 600 or 700.
Sorry. That was a bit long now ... lol
@Sula: I agree with your thoughts about the quality people save at is probably most of the issue. I save mine at the highest quality (12, I believe) at 6"x6" at 100 and they seem pretty clear & crisp. I've noticed when I go low they do get blurry at some sites, and I don't even have a fancy monitor.
just a Toshiba laptop.
@ Sula: Any tips you have on saving them so they don't look so blurry, I would welcome them...
Some kind lady at another site, when I was doing my first (slow) speed scrap this past spring, walked me through what to do since I was so new to this... Everything from how big the layout should be to start with (I wasn't using a template - didn't even know how to use one yet!) to re-sizing the layout to 600x600 when I was done so I would be allowed to post it in the gallery (she stressed that it had to be 600x600 or the site wouldn't allow the layout to upload) to how to upload my layout to the gallery & what kind of information I needed to provide (didn't know I'd have to list everything I used & by whom - it was definitely a learning experience for me). Anyhow, I wrote down everything she told me & I've done things that way ever since. I did notice that the journaling would become fuzzy looking after re-sizing (asked if there was something I could do to prevent that), but I was told it was normal.
Anyhow, I still consider myself a newbie in the digiscrapping world, and I welcome any & all constructive criticism anyone has to offer.......as well as any help/tips/pointers/suggestions they would like to give so I can be a better scrapper.
K, I made a discovery yesterday: When you click on the actual layout, it'll display in actual size and a lot more crisp than in the gallery preview, or the layout view. So, that's actually great!
Okay, you've convinced me
: minimum res has been changed to 600 x 600.
Ideally, for new layouts:
@ Lizanne: sorry, I totally forgot to hook you up with some good tutorials. I found this great post at my favorite digiscrap place, but since it's connected to a store, I'm not sure what pixel-scrapper's moderators and owners think about off-site linking ...
Off to ask about that in the support forum ...
@Jordan: Thank you so much!
That will make it so much easier on me, considering that's the way I was taught.
@Sula: I'd say pm me, but we don't have that yet.... BTW, have I said how much I like your layouts?! I find the majority of layouts that I click on "like" are yours!
@ Lizanne: aawwwe, thank you so much. That's very kind of you. I still haven't seen half the comments, I'm sure, because it requires to go through all images whether they have a comment or not. Can't wait till the notification feature is in place.
And I posted the link to the tutorial on saving images in this thread over in the Photoshop Forum.
Saw it - thanks