• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
0

Simple Photoshop canvas sizing issue.

New Here ,
Apr 10, 2024 Apr 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'm trying to make a canvas sized at 12.475 x 9.250, but Photoshop bumps the width to 12.477 automatically. This causes my KDP cover to be rejected. Does anyone have a solution for me? Thanks in advance!sizing problem.jpg

Views

177

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines

correct answers 1 Correct answer

Community Expert , Apr 10, 2024 Apr 10, 2024

Photoshop works in whole pixels not in inches (or cm or mm). No raster image can have fractions of a pixel.

So when you enter 12.475 inches x 9.250 inches using a ppi figure of say 300ppi that would be 3742.5 x 2775 pixels. As stated above you can't have a half a pixel so it becomes 3743 x 2775 pixels which when translated back to inches gives 12.477 x 9.25 inches.

 

Working in the given mm dimensions 316.87 x 234.95 mm @300ppi also translates to 3742.6 x 2775 pixels which when rounded to whole

...

Votes

Translate

Translate
Adobe
Community Expert ,
Apr 10, 2024 Apr 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You need to ask program questions in the forum for the program you are using
To ask in the forum for your program please start at https://community.adobe.com/
Moving from Using the Community (which is about the forums) to the correct forum

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Apr 10, 2024 Apr 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Oh, sorry about that! 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Apr 10, 2024 Apr 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Try changing to mm to avoid rounding.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Apr 10, 2024 Apr 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thank you for the suggestion. I had tried that, and it still changes the width.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Apr 10, 2024 Apr 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Photoshop works in whole pixels not in inches (or cm or mm). No raster image can have fractions of a pixel.

So when you enter 12.475 inches x 9.250 inches using a ppi figure of say 300ppi that would be 3742.5 x 2775 pixels. As stated above you can't have a half a pixel so it becomes 3743 x 2775 pixels which when translated back to inches gives 12.477 x 9.25 inches.

 

Working in the given mm dimensions 316.87 x 234.95 mm @300ppi also translates to 3742.6 x 2775 pixels which when rounded to whole pixels is 3743 x 2775 pixels. Translated back to mm it gives 316.91 x 234.95 mm so it has the same 'oversize issue'

 

I am surprised that your cover is being rejected for 0.002 of an inch over width particularly when their own dimension in mm ar 0.001 of an inch out from their dimensions in inches.

 

However as a way around it I would - create the document in Photoshop at the size given (accepting the rounding). Create an InDesign doc at the dimensions given (12.475 x 9.250 inc bleed) and place the Photoshop document into it using the top and bottom to hit the bleed edge exactly. Then export a PDF from InDesign inc the bleed. That PDF should be at the exact dimensions they require.

 

Dave

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Apr 10, 2024 Apr 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thank you so much for the information about why Photoshop is rounding up. I really appreciate it. I have never used InDesign before (cost), but I just tried the free trial version to see if I could use your get-a-round. Figuring out how to create a document seemed easy enough, then figuring out to 'place' it on the document seemed the way to go.

 

Long story short, I got a working copy in the acceptable dimensions. Thank you for making my day better!

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Apr 10, 2024 Apr 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Glad to help. 

If you do decide to continue with InDesign going forward, the best practice is to use Photoshop for raster images and use InDesign for text elements and laying out the spread.  That way you will be using the strengths of each application. Image files that are placed are linked, so if you place the image(s) from layered PSD or PSB files then edit those files you will get a warning in InDesign that the original image has been changed. If you click on the warning it updates the image in the document layout.

 

Dave

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Apr 10, 2024 Apr 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Working in resolutions divisible by 72:

 

2024-04-11_16-20-11.png2024-04-11_16-20-36.png2024-04-11_16-21-26.png

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Apr 11, 2024 Apr 11, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The issue being that some printers/publishing houses insist on files at 300ppi that don't then exactly fit their required physical dimensions. 

Rejecting a file for 0.002 inch oversize (or undersize if pixels were rounded down) when it already has a good bleed area still seems strange to me. It will all be trimmed off anyway.

 

Dave

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Apr 11, 2024 Apr 11, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@davescm 

 

Indeed, automated prepress preflight software should have some leeway/tolerance.

 

Even if it doesn't, there should be room for a human somewhere in the process to use common sense, but that probably doesn't fit the business model.

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Apr 11, 2024 Apr 11, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

Did you hide the template before submitting it?

By the way, I assume this is for a printed version (not digital, which would only need only the front cover and no bleed, of course).

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines