Scaling IF pictures to actual finished size

[Natalya Murphy]

When presenting the design for a small, framed item in IF, the finished frame ends up looking bigger than the actual frame is going to be because IF tries to maximize the final image on the screen.

Is there any way to show actual sizing for smaller frames on the screen, short of just resizing the entire IF window?

Conversely for larger frames, I've thought about trying to hook up a projector with a screen to try to display a "life-size" image so that a 32x40 frame would actually look like it's 32x40 in the preview. Has anyone tried this and had any success?

[Dani]

It sounds like you need to set the scale in the IF. The IF Manual shows you the screen captures as well (Click Help > User Guide).

On the first screen (Step 1: Load an Image), select an image that you know the width of. Click Set New Scale.

Click the left side of the object where you want to start measuring, then Click on the right side of the image. Enter the correct value in the new window (i.e., 5").

If you have several images open in different tabs, you can set the scale per image, for instance, if you have loaded a scanned object.

[kra]

A quick way I have found to get scale measurement is just use my mat corner samples. They are 4" wide so no need to measure anything, just drag across the width of your mat sample and enter 4

[Natalya Murphy]

I set the scale every time I take a screen capture. The problem is, if the finished frame is 5" x 5" and I'm previewing it on a 19" monitor, the frame picture fills the entire window, making the frame look bigger than it really is. All the proportions of moulding to art are correct, but the overall package is larger than it will be in real life because IF makes the picture fill up the entire display space.

[kra]

you could just save image as jpeg then bring that up with your favorite picture software and zoom in/out to approximate size
i do this sometimes and just hold moulding sample up to monitor to get the size about right.

[John Ranes II, CPF, GCF]

I set the scale every time I take a screen capture. The problem is, if the finished frame is 5" x 5" and I'm previewing it on a 19" monitor, the frame picture fills the entire window, making the frame look bigger than it really is. All the proportions of moulding to art are correct, but the overall package is larger than it will be in real life because IF makes the picture fill up the entire display space.

Hi Natalya,

I was discussing this same issue with John McAfee, the developer of Pre-View (http://pre-view.biz/) while in his booth at the Spring Fair in the UK last week, and this is something that is currently on his "to do" list. He recognizes this as an issue, and I appreciate your concern when I'm using the visualization software to upgrade and up-sell.

If a customer looks at a three inch mat and a four inch mat, but the outside dimension appears the same, you may get an "I don't really see much difference!" statement, "I'll go for the three inch mat as it's less expensive.".

I wouldn't be surprized to see several of the visualization software folks address this issue soon.

Regards,

John

[WizSteve]

I was discussing this same issue with John McAfee, the developer of Pre-View (http://pre-view.biz/) while in his booth at the Spring Fair in the UK last week, and this is something that is currently on his "to do" list.

Same here. We've had several people ask about this, as well as maintaining a consistant scale when viewing multiple snapshots side by side.

[Natalya Murphy]

Same here. We've had several people ask about this, as well as maintaining a consistant scale when viewing multiple snapshots side by side.

Oooh, ooh. DITTO on the consistent side-by-side scale. That has got to be one of my major grumbles about IF. Trying to sell the customer on 4" mats vs. 3" mats, but the frames look the same -- only the picture looks smaller. Arrrgh! One customer thought I was actually proposing to shrink the viewable area of the artwork when I increased the mat width until he took a closer look at the side-by-side screen shots and realized that the scaling was just different.