Coming
to Terms with DPI, PPI and Size
Background
I get a lot of questions about DPI,
PPI and image size, enough to indicate that a lot of
people are having trouble grasping some of these concepts
when applied to their images. In this article, we'll try
to make the terms and concepts of DPI, PPI, and physical
size a little less of a mystery while at the same time
offering some simpler methods of dealing with image/file
size and resolution.
Understanding the terms
DPI or "dots per inch"
is a term that normally describes the resolution of a
printer since printers produce colors by placing colored
dots on a piece of paper. A printer that has a resolution
or DPI rating of 2400 can place 2400 individual dots of
color within a one inch span on the page. If the printer
is listed as a 2400 x 1200 printer, the printer can place
2400 dots in an inch across the page and 1200 dots in an
inch down the page. A 2400 x 1200 printer can therefore
place about 3 million dots in a 1 inch x 1 inch square on
the paper. Resolutions of 2400 x 1200 DPI, 5760 x 1440
DPI, etc. are typical for inkjet printers.
Dye sub printers are usually
between 300 and 500 DPI. Why the difference? Dye sub
printers can produce continuous tone color, meaning that
every dot on the page can be an arbitrary color of up to
16.7 million possibilities. With an inkjet printer, the
printer can only "spit" a few different colors
(up to maybe 32 in some cases) for each dot, so much
smaller dots are used in combination to simulate
continuous color. A dye sub printer might place a single
dot of gray on the page for example, while an inkjet
printer might lay down 32 intermingled dots (16 black and
16 empty/white) in the same area in an 8x4 pattern to
"simulate" gray by using half black dots and
half white dots. Let's not get too caught up in printer
technology, however, and just remember that DPI refers to
a printer's capability to place individual dots on the
page.
PPI or "pixels per inch"
is a term that most often indicates the resolution of an
image file (a JPEG, TIFF, etc.) when that image file is
displayed/printed at a certain size. For example, if you
take a photo with your 6 megapixel camera that produces a
3000 x 2000 pixel image, that 3000 x 2000 pixel image
will be 300 PPI only if displayed/printed at a
size of 10 x 6.67 inches, 150 PPI if displayed/printed at
a size of 20 x 13.33 inches, and so forth. The bigger you
display/print that 3000 x 2000 image, the less PPI you
have to work with because the same number of pixels (6
million) is being spread over a larger area. As you can
see, PPI (resolution) and image size are directly related.
With respect to resolution (PPI) and image size,
increasing one will always decrease the other, and vice
versa because there are always 6 million pixels in your
3000 x 2000 images from your camera and the number of
captured pixels does not change.
One Size Fits All
When you look at an image that was
captured using your 6 megapixel (MP) camera, it will most
likely be stamped with an arbitrary resolution such as
300 PPI. A 3000 x 2000 pixel image from a Canon 10D
camera for example has 300 PPI recorded in the image file
as its "resolution". With 3000 x 2000 pixels in
the image, 300 PPI only equates to one size: 10 x 6.67
inches. When you open this image in your photo editor, it
will tell you that the image is 3000 x 2000 pixels, 300
PPI, and its size is 10 x 6.67 inches. Does that mean
that you should print all images from that camera at 10 x
6.67 inches? Does it mean that 10 x 6.67 is the maximum
size you can print?
Of course, stamping an image file
that came from a camera with a physical size is
completely arbitrary and an almost "backward"
way of thinking because the scene that you photographed
with the camera most likely wasn't 10 x 6.67 inches nor
is it likely that you will always print all your photos
at 10 x 6.67 inches. So why put information in the image
file that gives it a physical size of 10 x 6.67 inches?
The answer is that 300 PPI is just a general guideline
often used in the industry for "minimum resolution
for true photo quality". In reality, it is possible
to print excellent quality photos far above and below the
300 PPI "photo quality" threshold, so the
resolution/size that you see in an image when you open
that image in a photo editor is rather arbitrary and
should not be considered a magic number.
For most workflows involving
editing and printing images, an image should not have a
physical size until that image is displayed or printed on
a device and you shouldn't need to worry about size or
resolution until print time. You can't change the number
of captured pixels in the image anyway, so resolution is
determined (automatically) by size at print time.
Scanners are the exception to this way of thinking since
they scan an object with a known size at a chosen
resolution and you may wish to reproduce scanned material
at the same (scanned) size. Having to deal with image
resolution/size up front when working with photographs
from a camera, however, is a major point of confusion for
many people because typical photo editing software will
tell you that your photograph is 10 x 6.67 inches and you
begin to wonder what you have to do to print a 4x6, 5x7,
11x14, or some size other than the size indicated in the
image file. As a result, a lot of people end up
resampling (interpolating) their images to 300 PPI at the
new/desired print size as the first step, then editing
them, and finally printing. Such a workflow can and often
does cause image degradation due to applying the
interpolation at the wrong point in the process.
Interpolation to a desired print size/resolution should
be the last step in the workflow.
Instead of working backwards from
an arbitrary size of 10 x 6.67 inches and 300 PPI and
then trying to figure out what you have to do to print
the size you want, it makes more sense to simply remember
that you have 6 million captured or "original"
pixels to work with: an image that has 3000 x 2000 pixels.
Physical size (inches or cm) is not something that should
be dealt with until you determine what size you need at
display/print time. Leaving the image at its original
resolution (3000 x 2000) and resizing it only at print
time allows you to edit one copy of the image and then
create different print sizes from the same original. Just
remember that the larger you choose to display or print,
the lower the resolution (PPI) that 3000 x 2000 image
will be. If you print your 3000 x 2000 image at a size of
6x4, you'll have 500 PPI of data available in the
original image because 3000 / 6 is 500. If you print the
same image at 24 x 16 inches, your 3000 x 2000 pixels
will have to be stretched across a much larger space and
you'll only have 125 PPI from the image available at that
size.
If 300 PPI is generally considered
good enough resolution to reproduce printed photographs,
500 PPI is more resolution than you need so your 6x4 will
look fine. Does 125 PPI mean that you cannot print a 24 x
16 inch print because that is so much lower than the 300
PPI considered "photo quality"? No. Not
necessarily. What it means is that the image probably
will not be quite as sharp at 24 x 16 as it is at 6x4
when viewed closely. Resampling that 3000 x 2000 image to
a higher resolution before printing can make that 125 PPI
available in the image go a lot farther. Let's see how we
can make use of all this information in the most
effective way.
Making the most of it
The key to understanding how to
deal with resolution and size is to realize that there is
only one thing that is stable and will never change with
regard to your photograph that came out of the camera: it
has a given resolution and that resolution is static and
will not change. If you have a 6 MP camera that outputs a
3000 x 2000 pixel image file, that's the data you have to
work with: 6 million pixels. How you choose to "spread
out" those pixels on screen or in print is up to you.
Print the image at a small size like 6x4, and you'll get
a very sharp print. Print it at a larger size such as 10x8,
14x11, or more, and your print will begin to reduce in
sharpness and detail, but depending on the methods used
to print, you can often get very good photographs down to
150 PPI (20 x 13.3 with a 6 MP image) and even lower. The
key is in how you stretch your 6 million pixels
to cover a larger area.
As an example of "stretching",
you could take your 3000 x 2000 image and upsample/interpolate
the resolution to 6000 x 4000 before you print at that 20
x 13.3 size and in doing so, increase the image
resolution to 300 PPI. Interpolation is a way of "extrapolating"
data between pixels to create more pixels than were
recorded in the original. While this does not add any
real data to the image in the sense that only 6 million
pixels were recorded, a good interpolation algorithm can
predict what a higher resolution image might look like
and can reduce artifacts such as jaggies. Click on this link to view
how various interpolation methods can improve image
quality. Note that the "pixel resize" version
is what the small image on the upper right looks like
displayed at the larger size. By using different
interpolation methods, we are able to reduce or eliminate
the pixelization or "jaggies" that occur from
displaying a low resolution image at a large size. Also
note that while the images are improved by interpolation,
they are no match for the original image on the top/left
that was photographed at the higher resolution to begin
with. Needless to say, there is no substitute for real
data, but interpolation can improve things quite a bit
when printing at large sizes! As such, resampling (interpolating)
can improve print results when printing large sizes that
cause resolution to drop below 300 PPI.
Given the fact that our original
image (photograph) contains all the pixels that the
device could record and therefore the maximum amount of
data available to you, I would recommend doing all work
such as color changes, cloning out blemishes, and even
any sharpening needed because the original appears too
soft without changing the size or resolution of the image.
Remember that interpolated/resampled pixels are based on
the original/captured pixels so resampling first and then
editing only serves to increase the pixel count of the
images you are working with. It makes more sense to edit
an image that is 6 million pixels and then interpolate to
12 million pixels than to create 12 million pixels up
front and have to edit twice as many pixels.
Once any needed changes have been
made to the original image, the image can then be resized
or interpolated to the desired resolution for printing.
If you are using a photo editor, you can enter the
desired print size (say 11x14), enter a resolution (PPI),
and check "resample" so that the photo editor
will interpolate the image to the chosen size and
resolution. Size is often the easy part because you know
the size you want to print. For resolution, you want to
use a multiple of the actual/physical printer resolution.
For Canon/HP printers that would be 300 PPI for typical
photos or 600 PPI for optimal quality with the finest
details. For Epson printers, 360 PPI for photo quality or
720 PPI for photo quality with the finest details
possible. If you use a dye sub printer, always resample
to the "native" resolution of the dye sub
printer, 314 PPI, 320, 480, etc. Note that depending on
how effective your print driver is at stretching (or
shrinking) the image to fit on the paper, you may get
better results if you always resample to a multiple of
the printer resolution, even if you start with a higher
resolution than needed. For example, when printing to a
dye sub printer that runs at 314 DPI, the 6x4 print from
that 6 MP camera will likely print better if you downsample
the 500 PPI image down to 314 PPI before sending it to
the printer! In this case, sending an image to the
printer at 314 PPI actually produces better results than
sending it at the higher (but mismatched) 500 PPI!
Of course, it's always nice to
have a tool that will do all these calculations for you
so that you never have to worry about anything other than
making color, levels, and a few other adjustments on the
original, allowing the software to automatically
interpolate to the best possible quality at print time.
Qimage is such
a tool that will allow you to correct the original image
(in Qimage or using a photo editor) without ever having
to worry about DPI, PPI, or size. Simply make any changes
you like on the original without modifying the size or
resolution of the image and Qimage will handle all the
sizing and PPI calculations when you tell it the size you
would like to print, and will automatically resample to
the optimal resolution for your printer at print time
using advanced interpolation and sharpening methods.
While I did write Qimage and take the opportunity to plug
it here, it does allow you to work with images in a much
simpler and much more "forward" approach where
you edit the original pixels and let the software worry
about size, PPI, and DPI at the appropriate time: when
you are ready to print. It is probably the easiest way to
avoid the backward mentality of dealing with images that
have arbitrary size and resolution stamps that can often
prompt users to deal with resolution/size at
inappropriate times.
In Summary:
I hope this article will assist in
the understanding of PPI, DPI, and image size and will
offer an approach that is easier for most to work with.
Photographic images such as JPEG and TIFF images come
with a size/resolution stamp that can be useful when
doing things like scanning prints and reproducing them at
the same size. When scanning a given size media in a
scanner, recording the original size of the media can be
useful because it tells us how to reproduce that media at
the same size. If you want to reproduce the scanned media
at an arbitrary or different size, however, or print a
photo that came from a camera, such resolution/size
recordings in the image become arbitrary and often
confuse the issue. When you are capturing images at the
resolution limit of a device and/or you intend to
reproduce those images at an (arbitrary) size of your
choosing, it is best to just leave the images at their
native/captured resolution and only interpolate/resample
the images if necessary at print time since that is the
only time at which assigning a physical size to an image
makes sense.
Resampling images as a first (or
early) step and then editing them is a common mistake
that can cause problems when working with images that you'd
ultimately like to be able to reproduce at more than one
size. For example, resampling an image to 300 PPI at 11x14
and then editing color and other aspects of the image can
cause trouble if at a later time you would like to print
some 16x20 prints from the edited image. The edited image
has already been resampled to 300 PPI at 11x14 and
resampling it again to 300 PPI at the new 16x20 size
means that the image has gone through two resampling/interpolation
steps which can degrade the image and not give you the
best possible results.
Mike Chaney