I'm not the only one who was dealing with this Outlook issue (see links). But in the latest version, it seems to be back to normal 🙂 So thanks for challenging me to investigate it again! https://www.extendoffice.com/documents/outlook/3851-outlook-insert-picture-with-actual-size.html https://blog.gimm.io/how-to-fix-blurry-pixelated-or-fuzzy-email-signature-images/ Some extra arguments and remarks to support my feature request, though: 1. "There is no DPI setting in Photoshop or Illustrator" In Illustrator obviously not - that's a vector drawing app! In Photoshop - yes, there is. Please open the Image Size dialog to see it. And sure, the dpi are related to actual paper sizes, which is logical. When choosing not to Resample, the pixel count stays the same - resulting in a different size when printed - of course. For print, it is convenient - apart from having a lot of pixels, to set the ppi to >254, because the size when imported in e.g. InDesign depends on that. In that way the size at import is the 'original' that has enough spatial resolution to be printed nice and sharp. See how the same image imports in InDesign, with 3 different ppi settings. Again: it's nice when an image imports at the intended size. When it's way too big, because of the standard 72ppi, the designer could easily think that it's a high resolution image, which it isn't. (note: In print, a 300ppi image has to be halftoned in a much higher resolution. The halftone dots [which are spaced in lpi - lines per inch] are build in a spatial resolution more than 2400 dots per inch, for professional offset print.) 2. If it's not needed, and there is no tag (or metadata), why can Lightroom, Bridge and Photoshop change it in a batch process? And why not enhance Ae to be able to do so? What is the downside? 3. "Resolution is the number of pixels' That's an arguable statement. When comparing two devices or files, it is true. Number of pixels is a relative resolution. But it's of less use when it comes to the commonly used terms 'high resolution' and ' low resolution'. In absolute terms, when no output size or medium is given, the number of pixels is not enough to know whether the resolution is high or low. 1920 x 1080 px is high definitition, and for an sd screen, it is high resolution. But not on a 4K display, or printed on a bill board. A photo containing 1200 x1800 px can be rather hi or lo resolution, depending on the size it's gonna be printed. For a passport photo, it may be enough, but for a movie poster it's far too less. I thinks it's good to distinguish image resolution and spatial resolution, the latter is used for detail in relation to size. 4. I was not talking about .gif, most modern image formats do have a ppi in their metadata. But to be short: why not add a ppi setting to Ae image output modules? Makes some workflows much more comfortable, without having to go to another step in another app. Ppi is an image parameter anyway. I think it's not hard to add it. (and Ae may continue to ignore it at input)
... View more