[MCN-L] mcn-l Digest, Vol 22, Issue 2
What are you up to? -Original Message- From: "mcn-l-request at mcn.edu" To: "mcn-l at mcn.edu" Sent: 02/08/07 20:01 Subject: mcn-l Digest, Vol 22, Issue 2 Send mcn-l mailing list submissions to mcn-l at mcn.edu To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to mcn-l-request at mcn.edu You can reach the person managing the list at mcn-l-owner at mcn.edu When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of mcn-l digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: DM SIG: digital projectors (George Helfand) -- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 11:16:54 -0700 From: George Helfand Subject: Re: [MCN-L] DM SIG: digital projectors To: Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" I agree with Bruce, however you might want to prepare your images at higher pixel dimensions anyway in order to match future higher resolution projectors as they become available. When I was at UCLA, we offered slide conversion scanning for use in PowerPoint at 1280x854 pixels, even though user's projectors were primarily XGA (1024x768) or SVGA (800x600). The resulting JPEGs ranged from 200-400k, so there really wasn't any file size penalty. Now I'm seeing "WXGA" projectors advertised, which is 1280x768. Our scanning customers will be sitting pretty if they encounter one of those! George George Helfand Account Manager Luna Imaging, Inc. 2702 Media Center Drive Los Angeles, CA 90065-1733 Voice 800-452-LUNA (5862) Voice 323-908-1400 Fax323-221-2846 Cell 805-905-9562 E-mail ghelfand at luna-img.com Please visit our Web site at www.LunaImaging.com > Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 09:38:05 -0400 > From: "Deborah Wythe" > Subject: [MCN-L] DM SIG: digital projectors > To: mcn-l at mcn.edu > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed > > We've been having some discussions about the resolution of digital > projectors and the optimum size of images for projection. Since projectors > have specific pixel dimensions (just as monitors do), it seems that it's > futile to include images in PowerPoint presentations that are larger than > those dimensions. > > So for example, if the projector resolution is 1024x768, you should use > images around 1000 pixels wide, since anything larger is going to be reduced > to the projector resolution. > > Am I on the right track here? > Have people set guidelines for staff creating PowerPoint presentations to > guide them--if so, what size images do you suggest? > > Thanks, as always! > Deb Wythe > > > Deborah Wythe > Head, Digital Collections and Services > Brooklyn Museum > 200 Eastern Parkway > Brooklyn, NY 11238 > tel: 718 501 6311 > fax: 718 501 6145 > deborahwythe at hotmail.com > > Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 08:12:02 -0600 > From: Bruce Wyman > Subject: Re: [MCN-L] DM SIG: digital projectors > To: Museum Computer Network Listserv > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" > >> So for example, if the projector resolution is 1024x768, you should use >> images around 1000 pixels wide, since anything larger is going to be reduced >> to the projector resolution. > > You're absolutely right - images larger than the maximum screen size > don't get you anything (unless the image gets cropped or only a small > portion is used). > > Two tidbits I'd pass along -- > > First, if you're using photoshop to reduce the image from its > original size, after you've shrunk use 'unsharp mask' instead of > 'sharpen' or 'sharpen more' to clean up the image. For an image > that's about 1000px wide, try something like amount: 40%, radius: > 1.4px, threshold: 5 levels. Unsharp mask really gets at the actual > edges between things and tightens those instead of the whole image. > Also sharpen a little less than you want to. > > Second, for a ppt deck when saving the image to be used, you probably > only need a jpg with about 60-80% quality. You can go higher, but > you're not going to get that much more detail and the file size will > reduce significantly. I'd be surprised if any image that was going to > be used in ppt was more than 500k. > > -bw. > -- > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > -= > Bruce Wyman, Director of Technology > Denver Art Museum / 100 W 14th Ave. Pkwy, Denver, CO 80204 > office: 720.913.0159 / fax: 720.913.0002 > -- ___ mcn-l mailing list mcn-l at mcn.edu http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l End of mcn-l Digest, Vol 22, Issue 2 Phil Phillips New Media Development Manager National Museums Liverpool Tel: 0151 478 4213 Fax: 0151 478 4308 www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk National Museums Live
[MCN-L] mcn-l Digest, Vol 22, Issue 2
Hello Deborah and MCN folk, A year or so ago, I introduced a PowerPoint or, if you prefer, a less proprietary "presentation picture", or if I may obsess, a "projection photograph" sized jpeg into our image optimizing workflow in preparation for linking higher resolution images to our new collection information system. For internal purposes, it seemed to me that staff would benefit by having images available at their fingertips for lectures, print media design layout and other museum activities where image detail is important. Our system is still being implemented, but it seems that once the higher resolution jpegs are linked, it will lighten the load on R&R staff allowing them more time to focus on revenue producing activities. To distinguish between the tiny reference jpegs and the presentation jpegs, I added "_pp" to end the filenames and before the extension. The larger files average about 500K. Like the Denver Art Museum, CCP also sharpens the projection quality images using unsharp mask using settings very similar to what has been posted by Bruce Wyman. (Our unsharp mask settings are; 50% sharpening; 1.5 pixels; and a threshold level of 3) However, we standardized on a resolution of 150ppi. For rendering fine detail, this is helpful compared to 72ppi. We size the images at 7" in the longest dimension, and the longest pixel dimension is therefore 1050. This produces jpegs that range from 400-800K that can be used in-house for a multitude of purposes with some flexibility. I am now intrigued by the idea of reducing the jpeg quality from the highest point of high (12) to the minimum point of high (10). With 20,000 images scanned and 60,000 still to digitize, even kilobytes add up! On a related topic, have any of you experienced an increase in user expectations for higher image quality via your web sites over the past five years? If so, have you witnessed an increase, as well, in the comfort level of artists or copyright holders who have granted internet rights to your museums? As the CCP is about to launch a mammoth permission acquisition process I'm wondering what the current thinking is in regard to delivering images with a full screen view option, such as the jpeg size range we've been discussing and if it still might be considered risky by some, compared to thumbnails. Thanks in advance if you have any thoughts on this to share. ~~~ Dianne Nilsen Head of Digital Initiatives and Imaging Center for Creative Photography The University of Arizona P.O. Box 210103 Tucson, Arizona 85721-0103 phone 520-307-2829 fax 520-621-9444 email dnilsen at ccp.library.arizona.edu -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Phillips, Phil Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 11:45 AM To: mcn-l at mcn.edu Subject: Re: [MCN-L] mcn-l Digest, Vol 22, Issue 2 What are you up to? -Original Message- From: "mcn-l-request at mcn.edu" To: "mcn-l at mcn.edu" Sent: 02/08/07 20:01 Subject: mcn-l Digest, Vol 22, Issue 2 Send mcn-l mailing list submissions to mcn-l at mcn.edu To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to mcn-l-request at mcn.edu You can reach the person managing the list at mcn-l-owner at mcn.edu When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of mcn-l digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: DM SIG: digital projectors (George Helfand) -- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 11:16:54 -0700 From: George Helfand Subject: Re: [MCN-L] DM SIG: digital projectors To: Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" I agree with Bruce, however you might want to prepare your images at higher pixel dimensions anyway in order to match future higher resolution projectors as they become available. When I was at UCLA, we offered slide conversion scanning for use in PowerPoint at 1280x854 pixels, even though user's projectors were primarily XGA (1024x768) or SVGA (800x600). The resulting JPEGs ranged from 200-400k, so there really wasn't any file size penalty. Now I'm seeing "WXGA" projectors advertised, which is 1280x768. Our scanning customers will be sitting pretty if they encounter one of those! George George Helfand Account Manager Luna Imaging, Inc. 2702 Media Center Drive Los Angeles, CA 90065-1733 Voice 800-452-LUNA (5862) Voice 323-908-1400 Fax323-221-2846 Cell 805-905-9562 E-mail ghelfand at luna-img.com Please visit our Web site at www.LunaImaging.com > Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 09:38:05 -0400 > From: "Deborah Wythe" > Subject: [MCN-L] DM SIG: digital projectors > To: mcn-l a
