+- XBMC Community Forum (http://forum.xbmc.org)
+-- Forum: Help and Support (/forumdisplay.php?fid=33)
+--- Forum: Skin Help and Support (/forumdisplay.php?fid=67)
+---- Forum: Aeon (/forumdisplay.php?fid=68)
+---- Thread: Three... (/showthread.php?tid=45038)
- K-FleX - 2009-02-20 10:49
djh_ Wrote:Oh, and if anyone knows how to make high quality PDFs in InDesign I'd love to hear from them.
ethan_9219 Wrote:When exporting make sure to choose "Press Quality" as it is higher than "High Quality".
Make sure to turn off all down sampling as well.
But, if the primary distribution method of the manual is a digital PDF, then i think Press Quality might be overkill.
This is a couple of days old but I do this daily at work so I have some tips for you. I'm with ethan, It's a fine balance between quality and size.
My suggestions for a PDF that is used on screen predominately:
- Start by selecting the "High Quality Print" Preset up the top
- Make sure you have spreads turned off if you are designing your manual with facing pages (spreads prints pages side by side)
- Ensure compatibility goes back to PDF 1.4 (or Acrobat 5)
- Under the "Compression" section I like to:
- Set Bicubic downsampling to 150ppi
- Set the image quality to "High" (Max doesn't really add that much to the image quality but bloats the file size big time)
- Repeat for greyscale images
- Export and examine quality versus file size - Adjust the ppi according to taste - rinse & repeat
This should give you a high quality output without all the bloat in the file.
Another couple of tips:
- You have the option to change the Doc colour space into RGB as this might be advantageous to the color in your RGB screenshots (I never touch this though)
- You can run the "PDF Optimizer" & "Reduce File Size" under Acrobat Pro. This is especially necessary if you make changes in Acrobat - I have had problems where it will bloat my 100kb forms out to over 2 mb with a simple text change.
Enjoy
- stokedfish - 2009-02-20 11:28
This looks awesome, wow.
- .nimrod - 2009-02-20 18:17
something that i recently noticed in other skins as well, is that in showcase view, you can see the next reflection through the previous one
![[Image: 2enw8ch.png]](http://i39.tinypic.com/2enw8ch.png)
maybe you could have the reflections opaque and a transparent overlay of that bottom texture "between" (layer-wise) the covers and their reflections.
it's really a minor thing, and your work so far is really outstanding and enough reason for me to finally build an htpc to replace my good old xbox.
can't wait for the end of march
- asphinx - 2009-02-21 14:33
So I am not the only who noticed the reflection "thingy"?
On another matter though, I'm wondering regarding the suggested postersize, if posters at their largest size were to be "upped" to 1080p to mantain the aspect ratio (when compared to 680x1000px) that means the new size would be 735x1080px. At least according to my calculations. Or are they going to have a different aspect ratio? measuring the third preview screen of Aeon Stark (movie: Wanted) the ratio is not the same as the 680x1000px size posters... Okay, that explanation went too long now, simple version;
what height x width measurements are you djh_ suggesting for the 1080p poster size?
- djh_ - 2009-02-21 16:08
You're right that there is a discrepancy between the poster sizes at the moment, which I largely blame on there being no de facto standard for posters in general. Some are taller, others fatter. I guess I should make the info view respect the aspect ratio of the thumbnail views. I'll let you know as soon as something's set.
- asphinx - 2009-02-21 17:38
Okay. I think the "lack of standard" actually stems from different "poster-makers" using different standards as basis for their designs, United States and Canada using Letter size and Europe using A4. Then of course there's all the sizes in between were the various authors decided to not comply to any form of standard.
If I may be so blunt as to make a suggestion? Decide for one "standard", that actually is a standard (Personally I would go with the aspect ratio of 680x1000px as this is already quite spread as of now and of course because it minimizes my re-work..).
And I'm pretty sure others will follow, considering the large amount of followers you already have.
- pletopia - 2009-02-21 18:26
i've been recently getting something by 1500px (usually its like 1000-1025 x 1500)
- djh_ - 2009-02-21 18:36
I think the only way to do it "properly" is to download ten significant posters from each of the last four decades, jot down the dimensions and create an average. That said, the thumbnail views would take too long to resize now so I'm just going to match the info view up to those. I've never been too worried about precise dimensions as I've never had a perceivable problem with mine, and they're just sized to whatever-by-1080.
- asphinx - 2009-02-21 19:56
.. Good to know regardless. I definitely think you should just match them, better to have something unified that works without extra hassle. (By extra, meaning everyone would have to resize everything they have just for the sake of "correct-ness", this being very undesirable and time-consuming). That being said, I still needed to express my discontent with the lack of a standard as of now.
- pletopia - 2009-02-21 21:17
asphinx Wrote:That being said, I still needed to express my discontent with the lack of a standard as of now.
blame the industry for that .. they are the ones that create the posters