Any graphic designers here?
Lol – no pie charts
Basically I need to print some large banners with my company logo. The jpg’s I have of it are pixelated when blown up. The person who designed them sent some supposedly higher res pdf and psd versions which are frankly no better and the image has a rough edge when increased in size.
What do I need to ask him for so he delivers the correct version? Someone mentioned vector images does that sound right?
Edit – hi AdamPosted 4 years ago
For banner printing, you can get away with 100dpi at actual size, assuming he’s created them in Photoshop or similar.
But, if he just bumps up the res, you’ll still get stepped edges – you can’t add detail just by adding more pixels.
As others have said, they would be best redrawn in Illustrator then they are infinitely re-sizable.Posted 4 years ago
With my limited knowledge: banners don’t need to be mega high res as the viewing distance is usually quite large. You don’t need anywhere near 300dpi.
People used to use a program called genuine fractals to blow things up, but I think latest versions of PS are pretty much as good. There are different algorithms within PS you can use to enlarge images, some will work better than others for what you want.
Making massive files like this might beast your computer.
Obviously best thing is for them to sort out a proper vector logo though.Posted 4 years agoclubberMember
(since it got ignored at the time 🙂 )Posted 4 years ago
Unless it is all in Smart Layers.
… and given the information we have so far, what are the chances of that? I’m still going with my previous statement…Posted 4 years ago
If he’s done a logo in photoshop, then he’s a twonk 😉
Wheres Mrs toast? This thread is crying out for her contribution
Try telling .aol their logos are wrong:
Oh the irony. 🙂
From the very article you got that image from…
My snarky two cents: The long term problem here is the original name decision — America, On Line? Six syllables (which forced initials) plus a counterproductive meaning — the Web is inherently and joyously global, isn’t it? AOL should now have faced up to this fundamental identity problem, which has been compounded of late by a performance reputation problem, and fixed it with a name change.
“Instead, we have a design solution that diminishes, lower-cases, reverses and virtually hides the initials, as if apologizing for them. (It’s a visual equivalent of “if you have nothing to say, talk faster and louder.”)
“To be sure, mutable wordmarks (visual play, around consistent letterforms) can be fun. Certainly, MTV and Nickelodeon showed you can get away with it on television, and Google has shown it can work on the Web. But are these particular “Aol.” letterforms a strong-enough visual anchor? Not clearly. Verbally, they are still a hole in the hull.
“And are we now expected to write not AOL but Aol? (I refuse to add the period, in text.) And thus to speak it as a-awl, or a-owl? The punctuation of the logo introduces uncertainty of the name in text applications… which is not a good a way to build a stronger brand.”Posted 4 years ago
Yeah go on then, I hereby pass on ownership to you.
A little pro tip for you: if you’ve already got a half decent copy of the logo, then load it up on screen (needs to be full screen for best results), then place the monitor face down on a photocopier. Scan the screen, print out the results on a really big bit of paper. Place the photocopy on a flat surface, and take a photo with a high res camera, then copy that pic to the computer. The increase in pixels = an increase in resolution.Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘Any graphic designers here?’ is closed to new replies.