Scribusoid

Author Topic: pixels as unit type  (Read 8911 times)

SuburbanWorrier

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Karma: 0
  • Scribus User
Re: pixels as unit type
« Reply #15 on: January 14, 2015, 05:36:12 pm »
Additional thought: Scribus actually does what I need it to so I don't think I'm asking too much from a functional point of view. What I'd like to see is a more intuitive way to get to my end result.

GarryP

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1600
  • Karma: 25
  • Scribus User
Re: pixels as unit type
« Reply #16 on: January 14, 2015, 06:03:57 pm »
Ah. I see. I totally got the wrong end of the stick there. Sorry.

If I've got this right - and that's no way guaranteed - what you're doing is using Scribus to create artwork which will then be exported (or otherwise transferred) to a bitmap which will then be included on a web page. And, therefore, you need to make sure that the artwork you create is the correct size to fit in the <img>/<picture> that's on the page without it being scaled, overlapping other items, or being cropped. And you also want to make sure that pixel boundaries are taken into account so that antialiasing doesn't change the artwork.

Hmm… Yes, that is a problem. And a damn good one at that.

My first thought would be to correctly adjust the zoom level for your screen ("Preferences/Display") and take a screenshot of the size you need. It's a simple solution that I've used myself a few times but its real nasty and has all sorts of related problems. And it's no good as a long-term or high-volume solution.

I'll have to have a think about this - unless anyone else comes up with something. I've a feeling that it's not as straight forward as it first sounds.

For example, off the top of my head, Scribus doesn't - as a rule - use whole numbers for its position co-ordinates. Even if you type a whole number into, for example, the X-Pos field, it rarely stays as a whole number. (Just look at any SLA file.) So you can never be sure that any value will stay as you think it should be. Therefore, you can't expect anything to be at an exact position. And that's a major problem when you're trying to be precise with things like pixel boundaries. (I've had similar issues with this before, trying to get two rectangles to abut perfectly.)

With my limited brain power I'd say this was a two pipe problem at best, probably three at least. I'm currently stumped but it's certainly something interesting to think about.

Hopefully someone else has a particularly neat solution in the meantime.

SuburbanWorrier

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Karma: 0
  • Scribus User
Re: pixels as unit type
« Reply #17 on: January 14, 2015, 06:55:04 pm »
Yep, you got it!

Actually the "pixel perfection" within the file hasn't been an issue for me, and if it ever were it's likely that I'd make pixel-art in Gimp then lay text on top in Scribus.

Now I know I can use pt as my document measurement and specify sizes as if I'm dealing in pixels I'm all right (Jack). Hopefully this is also the solution for Brrt.

So glad we got beyond pdf! ;)

Nermander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1198
  • Karma: 15
Re: pixels as unit type
« Reply #18 on: January 15, 2015, 09:01:07 am »
As far as accuracy is concerned I know that Facebook needs an 851x315px image so what size should my document be?

Any size. The only important thing is that the width/height ratio is the same. Then just set the right PPI at bitmap export.

You can make the document 851x315 inches, and then export with 1 PPI (maybe it's called DPI in the dialog).

Or you can make the document 8,51x3,15 inches and export with 100 PPI.


The good thing with Scribus is that you can enter formulas for measurements. If you want to export using 50 PPI you can set the document width to 851/50 in and the height to 315/50 in. No need to do the calculations manually.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2015, 09:39:33 am by Nermander »

 

palmate