Image Placement Issue in InDesign: Placed Photoshop File Appears Too Small

Report · Jul 31, 2024

When I place a photoshop doc to an indeisgn file the image is too small, way too small. The canvas sizes are identical so this shouldn't be an issue. I have used these two applications like this for years and never had this issue. I even tried screen sharing with Adobe techs and they couldn't figure it out.

Report · Jul 31, 2024

in the future, to find the best place to post your message, use the list here, https://community.adobe.com/

p.s. i don't think the adobe website, and forums in particular, are easy to navigate, so don't spend a lot of time searching that forum list. do your best and we'll move the post (like this one has already been moved) if it helps you get responses.

<"moved from using the community">

Report · Jul 31, 2024

Are you using the Place command to insert the image in the document? It's far more reliable than drag-and-drop or cut-and-paste.

The apps sometimes interpret effective PPI differently, so an image that is several inches across in Photoshop may be two inches, or twenty, in InDesign. This is almostly always a temporary, meaningless misadjustment, easily fixed by rescaling the placed graphics frame. And when you Place a graphics, you can drag the placement frame to any size you like and it should scale the content to that size.

And, very basic but it's surprising how many users don't quite grasp the idea of pixel size and effective PPI — Place a PS image, and then see what the Info panel says is its Effective PPI. If you're importing a fairly small image, ID will import it at 72-96ppi; if you're actually having a problem such as you describe with large(r)-scale images, the InDesign value should be very high — 300, 600 or even higher Effective PPI values.

In general, it's hit or miss as to whether ID automatically places images at a desired or "comfortable" size. The best method is to draw the graphics frame first, then Place with it selected; second is to use Place and drag the frame to the approximate (or exact, with guides and margin snap) size you want it, and go from there. If you just click to place (or worse, paste), ID has to guess at the desired results, and it can't read your mind. 🙂

Report · Aug 01, 2024

The canvas sizes are identical so this shouldn't be an issue.

Hi @Benjamin98A4 , what are the canvas sizes and what Ruler units are you using in InDesign?

When you place directly on the page InDesign places an image at its 100% print output dimensions.

Report · Aug 01, 2024

Canvas sizes are identical and the same units are used. I’m using pixels as
my unit
Thanks

Report · Aug 01, 2024

InDesign is fairly weak when working in pixel-based layout mode. It's not really a good tool for making things like web banners, unless you use a workflow of designing at larger scale in standard units, and then exporting — carefully — to web-sized results. There are many oddities when attempting to work in pixels, and you've discovered one of them.

Report · Aug 01, 2024

It's not really a good tool for making things like web banner... This whole subtopic has always confused me, no more than here..

FWIW, the Pixel Ruler unit was added as a feature in CS5 15 years ago, and has caused a fair amount of confusion since because the Pixel unit makes it seem like the page has resolution—but it’s only a static measurement unit.

The only reason for the ruler unit addition was to make it more convenient to create and export web assets to an image format with InDesign.

I personally use ID all the time for web assets because I hate Photoshop’s typesetting tools. Prior to CS5 I could create a page using some other ruler unit, but if I wanted to export the page to an exact pixel dimension, I had to get out a calculator and do some math. With the Pixel unit I can set to size of the page to a specified Pixel dimension, and then it’s just a matter of setting the image JPEG or PNG Export Resolution to 72PPI in order to export the page to the same pixel dimensions.

Report · Aug 01, 2024

Canvas sizes are identical and the same units are used. I’m using pixels as my unit

InDesign pages are vector objects and have no resolution. There is a Pixel ruler unit which can cause confusion because it gets associated with image resolution. The Pixel ruler unit is a static 1/72" so if you want a 1800 x 1200px image to place as the same size on a ID page with its ruler units set to Pixels, the image’s Actual PPI resolution has to be 72.

Report · Aug 01, 2024

This whole subtopic has always confused me, no more than here.. The tendency is for loose-placed images in ID to come in far too large — sometimes multiples of the page size — rather than too small.

Report · Aug 01, 2024

The same image resized (not Resampled) to a Resolution of 72 Pixels/Inch and Width/Height print output dimensions of 25" x 16.667" (1800/72 = 25):

Placed on a 25" x 16.667" InDesign page:

If I change the Ruler Units to Pixels the Info panel shows 1800 x 1200 pixels (the print output dimensions would still be 25" x 16.667"):

Report · Aug 01, 2024

Has the image the same resolution in InDesign as in Photoshop?

Is the image scaled to 100% in InDesign.

Report · Aug 01, 2024

Yes the image has the same resolution and is scaled 100%

Report · Aug 01, 2024

I take it you are simply clicking with the Place cursor to get the results you see?

What are the pixel dimensions of these images?

Report · Aug 01, 2024

Yes the image has the same resolution and is scaled 100%

Are your InDesign Rulers set to Inches? This 1800 x 1200 px image has an output dimension of 6"x 4" and at 100% that’s the size it will place at on an ID page:

InDesign shows the output dimensions of the placed image as the same 6"x4" relative to the page

Can you show a similar capture of your image selected with the Transform panel showing?

Report · Aug 01, 2024

Yes the image has the same resolution and is scaled 100%
By @Benjamin98A4

As others have already explained much more eloquently, pixel units in InDesign have a confusing meaning.

I just created a 700 px wide, 144 ppi image in Photoshop. Placed it in InDesign.

In InDesign's pixel ruler measurements, the image is 350 px wide. The physical dimensions in inches are identical in both InDesign and Photoshop, as well as the ppi value. Plus, while InDesign rulers show the image as 350 pixels, the Links panel reports its width as 700.

Which is exactly what you experience, as far as I understand.

I think this discrepancy may also have something to do with the "retina" displays. When retina was first introduced, Photoshop had an option "Adjust to Retina" or something like this. This could be checked in the Photoshop app Get Info window. This option made images appear bigger (or smaller?) in Photoshop... I don't remember by now. Regardless, this option is long gone from Photoshop. But maybe the "retina" considerations add yet another level of confusion to this issue. I could be way off too, as, admittedly, I'm not even trying to understand it right now.

Report · Aug 05, 2024

Hello @Benjamin98A4,

I hope you are doing well.

We wanted to follow up on the status of your issue. Were you able to resolve it by following our expert's advice? If so, please share the solution that worked for you, as it may help others in the community experiencing a similar issue.

Feel free to update the discussion if you need any further assistance.

Thank you,
Abhishek Rao

Report · Feb 21, 2025

I am having the same issue I think. I'll preface it by saying I fully understand how resolution works and the difference between actual and effective ppi. Former graphic design professor here - I've taught resolution fundamentals for years.

I have designed a background in Photoshop that is 1080x1350 @ 300ppi. I want pixels and I want 300ppi. That's intentional. I place the .psd file at 100% in an InDesign document that is 1080x1350 pixels. One would think the .psd would place at the exact size of the InDesign page. It does not. It places at 100% but only is 259.2 x 324 px. If the .psd is 1080x1350 @300ppi then why doesn't it place at 1080x1350 @300ppi in the InDesign file? Why does it place at 259.2 x 324px? Of course, when I scale it up to fit the page, resolution drops to 72 effective ppi. I understand why but that shouldn't happen. I want 300 effective ppi when dimensions are 1080x1350 in the InDesign file. What am I missing?

Note: I tested when InDesign page intent is web vs print with no difference.

Report · Feb 23, 2025

What am I missing?

By @MoniqueBrickham

I can only suggest to reread earlier replies, such as these ones by @rob day :

The Pixel ruler unit is a static 1/72" so if you want a 1800 x 1200px image to place as the same size on a ID page with its ruler units set to Pixels, the image’s Actual PPI resolution has to be 72.

FWIW, the Pixel Ruler unit was added as a feature in CS5 15 years ago, and has caused a fair amount of confusion since because the Pixel unit makes it seem like the page has resolution—but it’s only a static measurement unit.

The only reason for the ruler unit addition was to make it more convenient to create and export web assets to an image format with InDesign.

In other words, for your particular goal, only physical measurement units (such as inches, points, millimiters etc.) can be reliable to match the dimensions of your image between Photoshop and InDesign.