Rendering Resolution for Powerpoint Presentation

[ivanjay]

I am creating an interior scene which I will place into a powerpoint slideshow. I anticipate it being presented on screen, if it is printed probably to 8.5 x 11, 11 x 17 at the very max.

 

What resolution should I shoot the rendering at? I went with 1350 x 1034 just to maintain a 1.3 aspect ratio... is that too little, too much, or just right? I would like to keep them small enough to avoid outsourcing to a farm and being able to render overnight on my machine... But, the images need to look crisp.

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

I won't comment on the resolution you need for PowerPoint, but I will add that PowerPoint is rarely the endpoint of a rendering. Typically it will need to be printed at some point, either in a book, or poster size.

 

Also, compositing into a low res image is fairly pointless. Our minimum resolution that we render at is 2500 pixels. Typically we try to keep it between 3500 and 5000.

 

As far as outsourcing... if you have a decent computer, and your images won't render you should look at your settings. Check your samples at material level, and global level. I also typically use no AA.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Crazy Homeless Guy

[ivanjay]

I won't comment on the resolution you need for PowerPoint, but I will add that PowerPoint is rarely the endpoint of a rendering. Typically it will need to be printed at some point, either in a book, or poster size.

 

Also, compositing into a low res image is fairly pointless. Our minimum resolution that we render at is 2500 pixels. Typically we try to keep it between 3500 and 5000.

 

As far as outsourcing... if you have a decent computer, and your images won't render you should look at your settings. Check your samples at material level, and global level. I also typically use no AA.

 

Although I certainly appreciate the answer and do not mean to put down the answer in any way I think what you are saying is very much subjective to the type of business.

 

We are a foodservice design company. Our clients typically take our renderings in a powerpoint presentation as a sales presentation outlining the changes to the restaurant / cafeteria / etc. If the renovation moves forward, we always provide the option to reshoot at a higher resolution for poster use. However, only about 25% of designed projects get built. Shooting at high resolution for each of these projects would add to a lot of dollars as we do at least 100 renderings per year.

 

Because of the nature of our projects, our models typically have extremely high poly counts. We are modeling abstract shapes for counter designs, incorporating signage, and most intensive is the including of food products in all of our equipment. It isn't good enough to just use a well for a salad bar, we need to put in food products into each pan. While we keep it as simple and low poly as we can this does add up to some extreme numbers.

 

Lastly, 75% of the equipment we model is comprised of stainless steel and glass, which result in very long rendering time as these are complex materials.

 

I have tried skipping or minimizing the sampling for AA and the results are just terrible. I typically set the sampling at 4/16, and bump the multipliers for shadows and glossy reflections to 2 or 3 to get good results.

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

I have tried skipping or minimizing the sampling for AA and the results are just terrible. I typically set the sampling at 4/16, and bump the multipliers for shadows and glossy reflections to 2 or 3 to get good results.

 

I wouldn't use a multiplier, I would look at controlling it at the material level. You will have much greater control over the image.

 

Also, when using MR I typically render at 1/16 using Box at 1 to 1.The sharpen in post. If you feel that 1/16 won't cut it, then try rendering slightly larger, and then down sampling in post.

 

Does setting global multipliers increase the sample settings on shadows? ...that alone could greatly increase render times.

 

In reality, you might want to look at rendering stainless in a separate pass, and setting it to either a solid material, or at least no glossies in the main pass. This could decrease render times greatly.

 

I am not trying to lecture or tell you what to do, but encouraging you to analize your workflow and check for ineffeciences.

[Matt McDonald]

I think the default PowerPoint slide is 8x10 and when I have been forced to make PowerPoint presentations I have found that images below 120ppi look fuzzy. I know, I know, it shouldn't matter but that's what I'd recommend.

 

I do sort of agree with Travis though, we typically render with the intent to go 24x36 @ 150ppi. I'd love to save some time rendering at a lower resolution but it seems like anytime I do someone says "can you print me out a 24x36 of that?" That's just my office though.

 

If this at all concerns you, I'd think about discussing the rendering resolution with whomever controls the purse strings, he or she might find the flexibility of high res renders very valuable. Even if they don't, you'll look good for being a forward thinker.

[ivanjay]

I understand your point on the multiplier, I think in part this just comes to be a lazy issue and not wanting to go into each material that requires adjustment after my test shooting is done...

 

How do you sharpen post? One of my biggest qualms is having to do a lot of post production work. I love just being able to shoot and put in some people and send it out.

 

The shadows is a separate multiplier, I normally bump that up one spot.

 

How would I go about the separate pass for stainless? i am totally clueless on how that stuff works...