Paint Shop Pro support - Pixels per inch for PowerPoint slides

Author

Pixels per inch for PowerPoint slides

Jeff

2005-06-10, 8:44 pm

What resolution (Pixels per inch?) should images be prepared for a
PowerPoint presentation that will be projected on a screen?

Similar question: at what resolution should images be scanned for a
PowerPoint presentation that will be projected on a screen?

Thanks.

--

Jeff Stevens
Email address deliberately false to avoid spam
jeff@stevens.com

Fred Hiltz

2005-06-10, 8:44 pm

Jeff wrote:
> What resolution (Pixels per inch?) should images be prepared for
> a PowerPoint presentation that will be projected on a screen?

Any resolution at all. Resolution is relevant only on paper--when
printing or scanning. The important measure is pixels. Find out or
estimate the pixels that the projector uses. Typical values are 1024
x 768 pixels. A top-line model might have 1600 x 1200 pixels. Make
sure your image is at least that size in pixels.

> Similar question: at what resolution should images be scanned for
> a PowerPoint presentation that will be projected on a screen?

Measure the width of your material in inches. Set the scanner
software PPI (often misnamed DPI for dots per inch) to produce the
necessary number of pixels. Example: a postage stamp 0.75 inches
wide to be projected at 1024 pixels wide, 1024 pixels / 0.75 inches
= 1365 pixels per inch.
--
Fred Hiltz, fhiltz at yahoo dot com
C-Tech volunteer

Jeff

2005-06-10, 8:44 pm

Thank you. That is very helpful.

Because I am a novice, please help me understand, because I am confused on
the scanning part:

I am scanning images that are roughly the size of a standard page (8x11). My
scanner gives me a series of choices for what it calls resolution (150, 300,
600, 2400 ppi).

It also has - something I do not understand - a choice between ppi, lpi
(1x), lpi (1.5x), lpi (2x), or custom. I've left this at the default of
"ppi".

If I scan at what it calls 600, I should be OK. Right?

Thanks.

--

Jeff Stevens
Email address deliberately false to avoid spam
jeff@stevens.com

"Fred Hiltz" <not@home.ca> wrote in message
news:MrGdnVEQpb65PjTfRVn-uA@adelphia.com...
> Jeff wrote:
>
> Any resolution at all. Resolution is relevant only on paper--when
> printing or scanning. The important measure is pixels. Find out or
> estimate the pixels that the projector uses. Typical values are 1024
> x 768 pixels. A top-line model might have 1600 x 1200 pixels. Make
> sure your image is at least that size in pixels.
>
>
> Measure the width of your material in inches. Set the scanner
> software PPI (often misnamed DPI for dots per inch) to produce the
> necessary number of pixels. Example: a postage stamp 0.75 inches
> wide to be projected at 1024 pixels wide, 1024 pixels / 0.75 inches
> = 1365 pixels per inch.
> --
> Fred Hiltz, fhiltz at yahoo dot com
> C-Tech volunteer
>

Marvin

2005-06-10, 8:44 pm

Jeff wrote:
> Thank you. That is very helpful.
>
> Because I am a novice, please help me understand, because I am confused on
> the scanning part:
>
> I am scanning images that are roughly the size of a standard page (8x11). My
> scanner gives me a series of choices for what it calls resolution (150, 300,
> 600, 2400 ppi).
>
> It also has - something I do not understand - a choice between ppi, lpi
> (1x), lpi (1.5x), lpi (2x), or custom. I've left this at the default of
> "ppi".
>
> If I scan at what it calls 600, I should be OK. Right?
>
> Thanks.
>
The files will be too large. If you are scanning photographic prints, 250 to 300 ppi will
collect all of the detail. Unless it is a small photo, the resulting Power Point
display will be too large to fit on the screen.

Another reply told you how to set the ppi, depending on the projector you'll be using.

Fred Hiltz

2005-06-10, 8:44 pm

Jeff wrote:
> ...
> I am scanning images that are roughly the size of a standard page
> (8x11). My scanner gives me a series of choices for what it calls
> resolution (150, 300, 600, 2400 ppi).
>
> It also has - something I do not understand - a choice between
> ppi, lpi (1x), lpi (1.5x), lpi (2x), or custom. I've left this at
> the default of
> "ppi".
>
> If I scan at what it calls 600, I should be OK. Right?

Resolution is the right term. I do not know what 1x, 1.5x, 2x mean,
but will guess that those are magnification numbers that alter the
PPI "under the covers" to produce images that will print larger than
what was scanned. What make and model scanner? Someone who knows it
will correct my guess.

Scanner manufacturers go to great confusing lengths to hide the
simple arithmetic that I wrote about above. Understanding PPI as a
division Pixels Per Inch isn't that hard, and I am not the first to
cavil about this. http://www.scantips.com is authoritative, easy to
read, and comprehensive. Recommended.

If you scan 8" x 11" at 600 pixels per inch, your image will be 4800
x 6600 pixels, which is huge for your needs. Do the math: given an
example projector that makes images 768 pixels high, the full page
11" high needs 768 / 11 pixels / inch = 70 PPI. Small print will not
be legible on the screen, which would also be true if you made and
projected a 35mm slide of the same page.
--
Fred Hiltz, fhiltz at yahoo dot com
C-Tech volunteer

Trev

2005-06-10, 8:44 pm

"Fred Hiltz" <not@home.ca> wrote in message
news:6qGdnVtetvfQJTTfRVn-sQ@adelphia.com...
> Jeff wrote:
>
> Resolution is the right term. I do not know what 1x, 1.5x, 2x mean,
> but will guess that those are magnification numbers that alter the
> PPI "under the covers" to produce images that will print larger than
> what was scanned. What make and model scanner? Someone who knows it
> will correct my guess.
>
> Scanner manufacturers go to great confusing lengths to hide the
> simple arithmetic that I wrote about above. Understanding PPI as a
> division Pixels Per Inch isn't that hard, and I am not the first to
> cavil about this. http://www.scantips.com is authoritative, easy to
> read, and comprehensive. Recommended.
>
> If you scan 8" x 11" at 600 pixels per inch, your image will be 4800
> x 6600 pixels, which is huge for your needs. Do the math: given an
> example projector that makes images 768 pixels high, the full page
> 11" high needs 768 / 11 pixels / inch = 70 PPI. Small print will not
> be legible on the screen, which would also be true if you made and
> projected a 35mm slide of the same page.
> --
> Fred Hiltz, fhiltz at yahoo dot com
> C-Tech volunteer
>

The Ix I.5x and 2x was lip Lines Per inch as used in the publishing industry
which equates to 75 ppi for news print 150 for normal colour and 300 ppi for
art paper I think

Jeff

2005-06-10, 8:44 pm

Thank you very much. Things are much clearer now and I really appreciate
the help. I suppose if I scanned them too large I could resize them in
PSP9, but now I understand things better.

For the record, the scanner I have is a Microtek Scanmaker 4900 and its
software is Scanwizard 5 and as is obvious I am still learning to use it.

Thanks again!

--

Jeff Stevens
Email address deliberately false to avoid spam
jeff@stevens.com

Fred Hiltz wrote:
> Jeff wrote:
>
> Resolution is the right term. I do not know what 1x, 1.5x, 2x mean,
> but will guess that those are magnification numbers that alter the
> PPI "under the covers" to produce images that will print larger than
> what was scanned. What make and model scanner? Someone who knows it
> will correct my guess.
>
> Scanner manufacturers go to great confusing lengths to hide the
> simple arithmetic that I wrote about above. Understanding PPI as a
> division Pixels Per Inch isn't that hard, and I am not the first to
> cavil about this. http://www.scantips.com is authoritative, easy to
> read, and comprehensive. Recommended.
>
> If you scan 8" x 11" at 600 pixels per inch, your image will be 4800
> x 6600 pixels, which is huge for your needs. Do the math: given an
> example projector that makes images 768 pixels high, the full page
> 11" high needs 768 / 11 pixels / inch = 70 PPI. Small print will not
> be legible on the screen, which would also be true if you made and
> projected a 35mm slide of the same page.

Dangerous

2005-06-11, 4:18 am

There is also a way to resize them in Power Point. But with
the image being way to large ...it is tricky but can be done.

--
Dora
Dangerous with Attitude

I do it cause I can
"Jeff" <jeff@falsepart.com> wrote in message
news:OZkqe.82378$NC6.35044@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net...
> Thank you very much. Things are much clearer now and I really appreciate
> the help. I suppose if I scanned them too large I could resize them in
> PSP9, but now I understand things better.
>
> For the record, the scanner I have is a Microtek Scanmaker 4900 and its
> software is Scanwizard 5 and as is obvious I am still learning to use it.
>
> Thanks again!
>
> --
>
> Jeff Stevens
> Email address deliberately false to avoid spam
> jeff@stevens.com
>
>
>
> Fred Hiltz wrote:
>
>

Trev

2005-06-11, 7:20 am

"Dangerous" <dangerous@telus.net> wrote in message
news:8Qlqe.48103$HI.8504@edtnps84...
> There is also a way to resize them in Power Point. But with
> the image being way to large ...it is tricky but can be done.
>
Will that be the usual MS way of altering what is displayed but leaving the
File size as IS.
You can adjust the size in front page so that an image only fills half a
window and still have it loading a 3 mb file

Dangerous

2005-06-13, 7:29 pm

I believe it is. I make PPS all the time.
Some are photos I manip and resize while
others are photo's scanned and given to me.
I find those ones I will either resize with PSP
or resize through power point.
I have never really worried about he size of the files
Most of the power points have been used on projector
after being made.

--
Dora
Dangerous with Attitude

I do it cause I can
"Trev" <trevbowdenATdsl.pipexDOTnet> wrote in message
news:M5WdnZz2V_6aLjffRVnyrg@pipex.net...
>
> "Dangerous" <dangerous@telus.net> wrote in message
> news:8Qlqe.48103$HI.8504@edtnps84...
> Will that be the usual MS way of altering what is displayed but leaving
> the File size as IS.
> You can adjust the size in front page so that an image only fills half a
> window and still have it loading a 3 mb file
>