0

Having issues with a texture graphic I use as the face of a label for product images. Currently, my strategy is to use an oversized image to be sure that it will output at a high resolution, but I realize this is shooting in the dark and I would love to know EXACTLY what size I should be making them. Regardless, the image file I'm using is around 16,000 px wide, a 10mb file and should be big enough to cover most anything, although I have no idea how to "see" exactly what size the cylinder I'm applying it to is (do I need to "unwrap" the cylinder?). Attaching both a sample of the "low-res" output and the packaged file for reference.

Note that I am using Cycles and trying to get a 1600px squared image at 300 dpi in the end. Any help is greatly appreciated, thanks!

enter image description here

FeastofSteven
  • 57
  • 6
  • Thanks @AllenSimpson - I have already done a great deal of testing before posting, so not sure where to go with your comment. Do you have any advice on what I should be testing? Happy to try anything, but need some direction on what to test, thx! – FeastofSteven Dec 21 '20 at 21:40
  • Thanks @AllenSimpson but I'm not sure that you're understanding the issue here or what the possible solution might be. To clarify, the resulting image has a blurry/low-res look to the image I am using as a texture, and I'm looking for specific advice on what might resolve that issue beyond the normal fixes that I've already tried. Thanks anyway, but I don't think your answer is relevant. – FeastofSteven Dec 21 '20 at 22:14
  • Ok then, I'm happy to delete – Allen Simpson Dec 21 '20 at 22:15
  • All I could say about that is that it doesn't look like it's antialiasing the text properly on the zoomed in image. If your goal is graphics with infinite resolution you'd turn to vector graphics. I dug up this question, it seems to be quite a process in blender. https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/105748/can-i-map-a-vector-image-on-a-mesh – Allen Simpson Dec 21 '20 at 22:21
  • I guess ot all depends on how large the rendered image will be and what percentage of the image will be displayed. It makes no sense to have a huge image if the texture it is only going to be a few pixels wide. Any form of re-scaling (be it from a few pixels to high-res, or a high-res to lower resolution) will introduce interpolation and affect the quality. While it is indeed preferable to have a larger image as texture than a small one, keep in mind that there is a point where the size will no longer make a difference. – susu Dec 21 '20 at 23:05
  • Thanks @susu that's helpful information and I understand what you're saying - but how do I determine what the EXACT right size is for that object? I'm a little unclear about the unwrapping UVs, etc. Any advice? thx – FeastofSteven Dec 22 '20 at 16:49
  • First you have to forget the notion of an EXACT size. Work backwards, what is the desired output? Work towards that goal.Test what works and what doesn't, so that your decisions are based on solid experience. 3D is computationally intense and resource hungry, usually you want to work with enough information to get a satisfying output, and no more, anything extra is just wasted computing cycles with no payoff. – susu Dec 22 '20 at 18:01
  • Thanks @susu I understand all of that, but just as Allen's comments above, you haven't offered any help beyond "experiment and find what works" -- as I've mentioned before, I wouldn't be here if I hadn't done that already. I need a solid place to start i.e. size of the object itself (no idea how to find out what that size is??? i.e. relative size I need to use for the image in pixels (agree that too big isn't a good thing, but that doesn't explain why it's coming out blurry/low-res looking) i.e. should I output at a larger pixel size and size down? I'm open to options like that if they work – FeastofSteven Dec 22 '20 at 18:28

0 Answers0