Current Picture Resolution
Added 2015-11-07 18:48:39 +0000 UTCHey folks, I received a few questions about the resolution of last month's illustrations, so I wanted to go over a few things, and get some input back from you.
Since so many people enjoy using my work as wallpapers, I opted to go for wallpaper size for my current works. I felt that wallpaper size (1920x1080) was still really big, even bigger than any of the rewards I personally get from Patreon artists that I follow. Also, it does save me a bit of time in the creation process, since my backgrounds are getting so detailed, recently. More time saved on one piece means I can make more pieces, after all. At least, that's my logic.
So, my question is, do you think they are large enough? I know my previous pieces were at 4000x3000 resolution, which was, as most people stated, insanely high resolution. While I probably won't use that exact resolution again, I would be willing to make it double wallpaper size (3840x2160). Mainly, I like the wide screen composition a lot, for most of my works. Of course, for Portrait works, I tend to use different dimensions entirely, but I could keep it in this range.
So what do you think? Should I continue with wallpaper size at 1920x1080 and save a bit of time in creation, or should I go all out and double the resolution?
Thanks,
~Ray
Comments
The iMac is 5K now... <a href="http://www.apple.com/imac/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">http://www.apple.com/imac/</a> and the Microsoft Surface Pro is 2736 x 1824! Even the humble iPad is 2048x1536, and has been since 2012! "Classic" low-res screens will be around for a while, but the new hotness is definitely here!
James Champlin
2015-11-08 21:36:39 +0000 UTCIt looks like that's the vote, so that's what I'll be doing! Thanks for the input, I appreciate it! :D
RoninDude
2015-11-08 20:08:42 +0000 UTCIt seems thats the overwhelming vote, here! Looks like I'll be working in a higher res from now on! Thanks for the input!
RoninDude
2015-11-08 20:08:17 +0000 UTCIt looks like thats the way it will be going! XD
RoninDude
2015-11-08 20:07:39 +0000 UTCOh wow, I had no idea! Still, I don't think my computer could handle anything THAT big. XD Still, it seems bigger IS better, in this case, so it looks like that's what I'll be doing. Thanks for the input!
RoninDude
2015-11-08 20:05:43 +0000 UTCI'm not sure what counts as "insanely high" anymore, as hi-DPI 4K and 5K displays are on their way right now, and suddenly those 1920x1080 images that some of those people wanted instead of the big ones will look pretty lousy all scaled up at 150 or 200%. Big, big, big! That way if someone needs a smaller version, they can always resize it in The Shop or Paint.net or Pixelmator, or whatever. :D
James Champlin
2015-11-08 15:30:51 +0000 UTCI'm in for larger resolution, double the resolution, double the fun! ;) Your high resolution artworks is one of the reasons I've became one of your patron! Sorry for the longer time needed... :)
Köinzell
2015-11-08 06:01:59 +0000 UTCI love the higher res pics. They work very well as backgrounds for computers, phones, tablets, etc more-so than the standard 1080p sizes.
SajuukCor
2015-11-08 04:18:18 +0000 UTCHigher the better for me; just like macro photography ^_^
2015-11-07 23:18:09 +0000 UTCI will probably do that. Put the smaller images in the post, with a Patreon Watermark, and then give the huge ones at the end of each month with the rewards. Thanks for the input!
RoninDude
2015-11-07 22:34:02 +0000 UTCYou could supply both really. It's no bother to downscale an image but some folks don't have the software handy. Maybe put the lowres as a link in the post while the high res is the main image? Maybe the other way around?
Zombie Possum
2015-11-07 22:29:21 +0000 UTCIt looks like it's been decided but as an artist who likes to study the work of other artists (especially their line work) my vote is for bigger. Thanks for asking!
Zombie Possum
2015-11-07 22:27:51 +0000 UTCHaha ok ok, it looks like bigger is the vote, so far. :D
RoninDude
2015-11-07 21:56:07 +0000 UTCNeil Stevens (PresJPolk)
2015-11-07 21:53:17 +0000 UTCThanks for the input!
RoninDude
2015-11-07 19:08:25 +0000 UTCOk, cool! I am leaning towards doubling wallpaper size, anyways... It'd make it easier for prints and such, later.
RoninDude
2015-11-07 19:08:09 +0000 UTCI say go with what ya think goes for the piece, 1920x1080 works for me, but the higher res still works great.
Matthew D. Riddle
2015-11-07 18:57:32 +0000 UTCDidn't mean to hit the enter button. I was going to say that for once, I actually think you should go back. I really enjoyed the higher resolution for wallpapers and etc. The 4000 etc was massive and pretty unnecessary, but a higher resolution would be cool again.
DonAnon
2015-11-07 18:56:44 +0000 UTCHAHA, DOH! Sorry bruh!
RoninDude
2015-11-07 18:55:09 +0000 UTCI use 1920x1200, so I'm a bit biased :P
DonAnon
2015-11-07 18:54:13 +0000 UTC
