New Participant

Question

Problem with dpi and resolution when exporting for Adobe Première Pro

Forum|Forum|3 years ago
October 25, 2022
5 replies
4633 views

Hello community,

I created a ind file with a 1920x1080 resolution in order to export images to insert in an Adobe Première pro project.

When I export them in 72dpi and insert them in Première, I notice that after uploading the video on a streaming platform, the text is pixelized.

So I tried to export with more dpi, but then the exported images have a resolution that is much bigger than 1920x1080.

How can I export high dpi images with a resolution of 1920x1080.

Thank you in advance for your help,
Emmanuel

Import and export

This topic has been closed for replies.

Brad @ Roaring Mouse

Community Expert

1920x1080 is a fixed entity. You cannot render a higher resolution version. You only have a "grid" of that exact amount of pixels, and text will only render as clear as that "grid" will allow. When you exported your ID file to 72ppi from a document sized 1920x1080, you should have ended up with a file that is exactly 1920x1080. You can confirm this in Photoshop.

Anti-aliasing is usually applied by default on these exports, which causes what looks like a blurry edge. If you trurn anit-alaising off, you will get crisp pixel edges, but at teh expense of the actual pixels showing up more, making the text look ragged.

You can control the level of antialaisiaing in Photoshop much better, so it's usually better

What I suggest people do for Premiere is to render out your images at the higher resolution with NO antialiasing and then place them in Premiere. This will put the onus on Premiere to render the final as it sees fit, perhaps with abetter anti-alaising results giving you a better looking video.

rob day

Community Expert

1920x1080 is a fixed entity. You cannot render a higher resolution version.

Hi Brad, it’s the Resolution field in the image export dialog and the static InDesign Pixel dimension that can be confusing. As we have all noted, 72ppi is the required number in order to get an exported pixel dimension that matches InDesign’s Pixel ruler dimensions.

But, I could also set up an InDesign document as 6.4" x 3.6", and if I wanted a 1920 x 1080 pixel dimension export, I would have to set the Resolution to 300ppi. In that case Photoshop’s Image Size dialog would still show the pixel dimensions as 1920px x 1080px, but at 300ppi. My script handles Resolution and fixed Pixel Width conflicts for cases where you don’t want to work with Pixel ruler units, but still want to export to a specified pixel dimension without doing the math:

You can control the level of antialaisiaing in Photoshop much better, so it's usually better

True, if you are setting type in Photoshop the type tool has the extra anti-aliasing options, but I actually prefer the anti-aliasing that comes with the InDesign image and PDF exports, so I’m still not going to drive myself crazy setting type in PS for an image web asset.

It may be that if you put the 1920 x 1080 pixel image into Premiere it’s going to resample the pixels in a bad way. If that’s the case you might be right—a higher pixel dimension could ensure the resample is at least downward.

Brad @ Roaring Mouse

Community Expert

"a higher pixel dimension could ensure the resample is at least downward."

Yup, especially if they want to do any zoom effects on their images in Premiere. It would be better to work with vector type in After Effects if they want to do that.

rob day

Community Expert

Hi @Yteu267924149mga , InDesign pages don’t have a resolution, but they do have a Pixel Ruler Unit. If the page dimensions are actually 1920x1080, and you export a PNG at 72ppi, the PNG opened in Photoshop should have a matching 1920 x 1080 pixel dimension.

Here I have my Page Tool active and the Transform panel is showing 1920x1080. If I export at 72ppi, the PNG in Photshop has the same dimensions:

Dave Creamer of IDEAS

Community Expert

If I had to use InDesign, I would suggest exporting it at 144 ppi so it is effectively a 4K image, then reduce in PPro.

David Creamer: Community Expert (ACI and ACE 1995-2023)

rob day

Community Expert

So I tried to export with more dpi, but then the exported images have a resolution that is much bigger than 1920x1080

But @Yteu267924149mga seems to need the exact pixel dimension, 144 would export as 3840 x 2160. Maybe the text has been set too small relative to the 1920 x 1080 canvas?

Dave Creamer of IDEAS

Community Expert

What are you doing in InDesign that can't be done in Premiere, After Effects, Photoshop, or Illustrator? InDesign would be my last choice (if I ever chose it at all).

Also--what size video did you export? What were the settings? What size monitor did you view them on (resolution)?

If you need to use InDesign, try exporting it at 4K (3840x2160) and resize in Premiere.

BTW, video does not have a ppi [dpi]--it simply has X number of pixels by Y number of pixels.

David Creamer: Community Expert (ACI and ACE 1995-2023)

James Gifford—NitroPress

Brainiac

BTW, video does not have a ppi [dpi]--it simply has X number of pixels by Y number of pixels.

True. But to get from a vector layout to a specific pixel dimension, an effective PPI has to be used as the scaling factor.

But no, ID is not really a good tool for any of this. It can do acceptable layouts for export to video resolution, but it's far from optimal if you have the rest of the Adobe tools.

James Gifford—NitroPress

Brainiac

I'll be surprised if you were working in pixel dimensions at 1920x1080. 🙂

I was.

The only reason for the static 1/72" Pixel Ruler Unit in InDesign is to make the math on exports to a matching pixel dimension easier—72ppi always exports a matching dimension. I’ve never found any evidence that setting type or placing vector objects in Photoshop produces better results given the same pixel dimensions.

Here‘s 20, 12, and 8pt:

I was.

Okay, color me Surprised (equivalent to Pantone 1777U!!!). 🙂

You are probably right that ID — at least in these later days — doesn't really care what the working scale is. I may be working from old experience.

I will loosely maintain my principle that working to a relatively large scale and reducing at time of export or conversion in a better tool produces better raster output in almost all cases. More pixels to work with for hinting, aliasing, blending etc. is never a bad thing.

And, in cases like this, attempting to work 1:1 in a tool not well suited to raster output is going to lead to less than desirable results unless the user is experienced and careful with all the details. (Literally and figuratively, I guess.)

James Gifford—NitroPress

Brainiac

Don't create InDesign documents with pixel dimensions. That is a limited approach barely suited to creating things like web banners; ID is not really a raster image tool.

Create a document with the proportions you need, in inches or picas, and then export to the precise pixel dimensions you need by adjusting the export resolution. For HD, use a document that is 16x9 inches. The export image size will be controlled by the export resolution, not the native document size.

As for type, you are better off using Premiere/AfterEffects titling to get the highest quality text. Limit text in imported images to large, artistic type, not small 'content' type.

Robert at ID-Tasker

Brainiac

Can you show an example?

My knowledge of the Premiere is nill - but I'm pretty sure you can't expect text to be vectors - like in PDFs ? It will always be pixelized.

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