Skip to content
Translate Ideas and Comments
Choose language:
There was an error during translation

Gavin Anderson

My feedback

2 results found

  1. 73 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Gavin Anderson commented  · 

    I agree with this. So far as I've been able to tell, there's no way to control both dimension AND resolution of the screen output.

    Example, for a certain social media profile, I need to have a JPG or PNG that is 400x400px @ 96ppi.

    I can output a 400x400px file OR I can output a 96ppi file, but I can't output a file that is 400x400px @ 96ppi.

    Gavin Anderson supported this idea  · 
  2. 910 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Gavin Anderson commented  · 

    Would it help if there was a “virtual scale”? Say, if you could define a scale of 1:10 so that input fields accept bigger values, and exported files are at scaled size (10x in this case)?

    Virtual scale would work, if there's no other option. But uncapping the size limit would be better. We work on very large scale "environmental" pieces: putting an art wrap across a freeway underpass, covering an entire interior wall of a building, that sort of thing. Typically, we end up sending a reduced file to the vendor, and telling them how much we need its scaled up. It would be nicer to send everything at 100% actual size.

Feedback and Knowledge Base