Add the Image Dimensions in PX for a given product to the Product Page for customer/designer benefit

[CreativeLeahG]

I as a designer find it hard to find out what ' px image dimensions' are required as a minimum for certain products when designing so I can only assume it is harder for customers. It would be fantastic if in the 'about section' of the product, this information was included so customers and ourselves can swiftly note the dimensions and then create/upload an image to suit without having to go back and forth or look for the pages that relate to these details.

A good case in point was recently trying to work out what px to use for rugs.

I recognize this lack of ability to easily access this info could also just be a 'me' problem!

Another way to approach this would be to have the image size/file type etc on the 'cover/place holder' images for the blank products. So it is instantly identifiable, and we don't even have to refer to the 'about this product' section.

[KeegansCreation]

Yes. Clearly the rug images have to be large, but how large? I kept guessing wrong.

[CreativeLeahG]

@KeegansCreation yep, same here, back and forward and in the end I got 'close enough' and so just added a color border background! Very time-consuming.

[CrazyMermaid]

I have to disagree. All of my photoshop settings in in inches. Pixels really don't give me a sense of anything. Do you really think most non-designer customers think in pixels? It says an 8x10 foot rug. Oh wait a minute, is this because you aren't US-based and the inches and feet thing is weird for you like temperatures in Celsius are for me? When people tell me that they want me to participate in a 5k fun run. I have no idea of how long that is. 

[CreativeLeahG]

@CrazyMermaid I'm not suggesting we get rid of the feet and inches, just add the PX along with the other dimensional info. Customers do get a warning if their images aren't of a high enough resolution, this would help them with this.

Ps. I am still old school, I'm very much a feet and inches gal, hate metric system!! 

[Cat]

Even if we knew what the DPI was for each product's printing that would help. Then we could do the calculations ourselves. At least I assume that's how they're calculating the minimum pixels for each design area.

In terms of the area rugs. I haven't done many, but I ended up using 15Kx15K pixels (made them square in case someone wanted to use the round shape). That may be overkill, but I just kept making it bigger until I didn't get the warning. Good thing I invested in that schmancy photo enlarging software!!

[KeegansCreation]

" Good thing I invested in that schmancy photo enlarging software!!"

Is it Topaz Gigapixel? Or do you use a different one?

[Cat]

@KeegansCreation It's Topaz Photo AI - not sure if that's the same thing as Gigapixel or not. It's pretty amazing though. You have to play with the settings a bit, and if you need it to be huge you sometimes have to enlarge it in steps, but I've been able to get good results even upscaling photos that I took back in the dark ages of digital photography (like 640x480 resolution) to quality high resolution images. Only drawback is faces - I enlarged a really tiny old photo of a friend of mine because you couldn't really see her face, and while the enlarged photo did indeed look like a person, it didn't exactly look like her! 

[Jadendreamer13]

The now non-supported Adobe Photoshop add-on called Adobe Design to Print used to set up your photoshop file in the appropriate design size and DPI settings based on the product you selected, and then it exported all the layers as separate .png files into the design tool. Plus, you could preview what the product would like and make adjustments prior to moving the files to the Zazzle design tool.

While this add-on still works for previous versions of Photoshop, since Adobe/Zazzle no longer support Adobe Design to Print, new products like rugs, etc. are not available in the product library.

This was such a useful tool, and a real time saver. Please Zazzle bring back this tool.

[Badeesie]

@Cat  If enlarging makes the photo look like a person but not like the person originally in the photo, that sounds like a good way to get placeholder images without needing a model release. 😋

[Cat]

@Badeesie Ha! I never thought of that! Hmmmmm.....