Known Participant

Question

JPG not placing at proper dimensions

Forum|Forum|6 years ago
April 4, 2019
6 replies
9532 views

I just performed the latest update to 14.02. Now when I place a jpg link, it is not placing at the full dimension. It is scaled down (I presume because of the 72ppi resolution). We are a large format printer. The resolution we work with always 125ppi or less. Is there a setting I can change back to always have them place at full dimension?

This topic has been closed for replies.

H

howlaman

Known Participant

Was this issue ever resolved? I'm not seeing a solution marked here and am having the same problem using 17.1 x64. I also had this same issue with a previous version; updating so far has not solved it. ID randomly decides to place jpg images under 300 DPI at a scale that makes them 216 DPI. This is the exact same resolution the original poster depicted in their screenshot on April 4, 2019.

I'm not placing into an existing object - this is a completely new, blank document. The ducoment is 1920 px wide, with measurements in pixels, but it's still bringing in my 1920 pixel wide images at 1/3 scale.

rob day

Community Expert

I’m still seeing it happen with version 16.4. I would place .PSDs rather than JPEGs

rob day

Community Expert

For this particular project, the original files are made in a completely different format - there is no high resolution jpg. The original document contains multiple vector layers that, when exported to pdf, were loading slowly for some people (even at proof quality), leading to confusion with them thinking layers were 'missing,' so flattened image format is simply an easy way to avoid this confusion while using minimal storage space.

Apologies, but can we please end this converation if there is no solution to this issue ID is having? If there is a place in a uservoice forum or elsewhere to mark this as a potential bug, I'm happy to move there. This discussion is, again, unrelated to the reason this thread was made. I don't want to post off-topic in here any more than necessary. .

Apologies, but can we please end this converation if there is no solution to this issue ID is having?

If you want the Actual and Effective res to match you could divide the effective by the actual to get the needed scale. In your example 216/72 = 3 so if you set the image scale to 300% the effective res would also be 72ppi and the pixel dimensions of the scaled object would be 1920 x 768—that could be easily scripted

The bug still existsyou can report it here:

https://indesign.uservoice.com/forums/601180-adobe-indesign-bugs

so flattened image format is simply an easy way to avoid this confusion while using minimal storage space

You can force placed layered vector art to flatten into an image on a PDF export

Scott Falkner

Community Expert

Is the issue caused by using the unit InDesign calls pixels an assuming those are pixels? Those are not pixels. They are points.

If you place a 300 ppi image that is 300 pixels x 300 pixels and your units are pixels you should expect the image to be 300 pixels x 300 pixels in InDesign. After all, you specified pixels as your unit. Instead the image will be 72 pixels x 72 pixels because a 300 ppi image taht is 300 pixels wide will print at 1 inch. One inch is 72 points.

M

mschs6819

Participant

No, that’s not it. My units in the InDesign file are inches.

W

www_Amercan_black_forum_g

Participant

AnshulJain19

Adobe Employee

Hi Dan,

It would be great if you can send one such jpeg to us @ ansjain@adobe.com, it will help us in reproducing the issue at our end.

Also before 14.0.2, in which version you remember working it correctly?

Regards

-Anshul

danm22902856Author

Known Participant

Hello,

We were using the previous update. 14.0.1 and never had the issue in any previous versions.

I will email the file to you.

Thanks.

M

Migintosh

Legend

Since I don't generally use 72ppi images, I hadn't tried it before, but I'm getting the same results as you, not only with InDesign 14.0.2, but also with CS5.5 (7.5).

A 40"x25" jpg created in Photoshop at 72ppi places in a 60"x60" InDesign page as 8"x5" at an effective ppi of 360. If I save the image as PSD or Tiff, it places at actual size, and if I change the 72ppi jpg to 73ppi without resampling in Photoshop, it places as actual size in InDesign (both versions).

John Mensinger

Community Expert

danm22902856 wrote
because of the 72ppi resolution

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that but in any case, nothing has changed that would produce the mis-sizing you describe.

Have a look at Preferences and make sure the Content-Aware Fit default option is NOT enabled.

danm22902856Author

Known Participant

Content aware fit is not checked.

We have jpegs. Apx 40" wide. When we place them as links, they are 15" wide on our page.

If we change the format to tiff for example, this does not happen. Only with jpg.

M

Migintosh

Legend

It may be possible that the difference you are seeing is not because one is a jpg and one is a tiff, but rather that one has been re-saved. Just to be sure, try to do a save-as with a different name (so as to not over-write your original jpg), and save it as a jpg also. This could be because the original file may not have a resolution assigned to it yet, which I think can be true of files that come directly from a digital camera.

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded