Skip to content

Phillip Fischer

My feedback

1 result found

  1. 5 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
    Phillip Fischer commented  · 

    I'm going to +1 onto this, but it's not a new thing. I found a post on StackExchange finding this occurring after CS6, back in 2015. (https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/36566/how-do-i-get-adobe-indesign-cs6-to-export-high-quality-pngs)
    I'll recap their findings, and mine agree with it:
    "It occurs when a graphic containing an alpha channel ("transparency" in the case of PNG, or the existence of any layer other than "background" for PSD) is displayed in InDesign at a size other than 100% (the image, not the boundary) and/or at a DPI/PPI different to that of the document, and is exported either as a PNG or PDF. It seems it switches to a different resampling algorythm for high quality output, but messes up somewhere giving this awful jaggy nonsense."

    My experience mirrors their own. I've attached a screenshot comparing 2 pngs exported from InDesign. Each of them is nothing more than a placed PSD, and the only difference between the two is that the PSD has been flattened in one. The other only has 1 layer, and has no transparency, but since the only layer is not seen as a "background" layer, the file seems like it's viewed as having transparency and seems to cause the PNG to get ugly.

    Phillip Fischer supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base