Outlook 2013 signatures - Teh Forum

Outlook 2013 signatures

From: graphitone29 Oct 2013 15:58

To: ALL1 of 23

Anyone had any problems getting an image into a signature in Outlook 2013? We've got a handful of people at work who have a small image in theirs that shows they're bigwigs in the Legal 500.

However, it's not working as it should. I've stuck the jpeg in and all looks fine in the signature editor, then the image gets blown up out of all proportion when the email's sent. I've recently happened on this website that goes someway to explaining what's going on.

Quote: From the site

This issue usually happens when you are using a picture other than 96dpi.

When inserting a picture, Outlook will rescale the image as if it was a 96dpi image. This means that if you have a picture of 150dpi with a height of 88px, it will be displayed as an image of 56px high;
88px/150dpi * 96dpi = 56px

It even gets worse; upon sending, Outlook will convert and compress (re-render) the images to 96dpi with the new dimensions permanently! This means that all the "detailed" picture information is lost and you'll be sending an image of 96dpi which is 56px high. This is of course a severe and very visible quality loss.

If your picture is less than 96dpi, then the opposite happens. A picture of 88px high with a dpi of 32 would then result in a 96dpi image of 264px high. So the result will be a very large image (but this time you can resize it back without the image becoming blurry).

This is a long outstanding issue/function/design choice which goes back all the way to Word 6.0 from 1993.

So, creating the sig in Outlook creates an HTML file full of Microsoft's usual gumpf and outputs two image files based on the original FOR NO FUCKING REASON I CAN SEE:

Code:

</v:shapetype><v:shape id="_x0000_i1025" type="#_x0000_t75" style='width:56.5pt;
 height:73.5pt'>
 <v:imagedata src="rsr-4_files/image001.jpg" o:title="logo"/>
</v:shape><![endif]--><![if !vml]><img width=113 height=147
src="rsr-4_files/image002.jpg" v:shapes="_x0000_i1025"><![endif]><o:p></o:p></span></p>

One's big, one's small. But both aren't right. I've tried overwriting the two image00*.jpg files with a 96dpi image, tried changing the two existing ones to 96dpi and tried hosting the file somewhere else. Oh and I've changed the pixel width/height values in the code too, but Outlook overwrites them when adding the signature into an email.

I'm stuck. :C

Any ideas?

0/0

From: Drew (X3N0PH0N)29 Oct 2013 16:39

To: graphitone 2 of 23

40748.2 In reply to 40748.1

Are you sure you're saving them at 96dpi? Cos based on what you've posted that should solve it (it makes sense, like).

It should be the one you import into 'signature editor' (or whatever) that you rescale, not the ones that are spit out at the other end (it'll be too late at that point).

0/0

From: Ken (SHIELDSIT)29 Oct 2013 16:51

To: graphitone 3 of 23

40748.3 In reply to 40748.1

I have an image in mine that is 61x79. I haven't heard of any issues like you are seeing.

My code looks like this:

Code:

<v:shape id="Picture_x0020_3" o:spid="_x0000_s1026" type="#_x0000_t75" alt="Matson FINAL VERSION one color green tree no box" style='position:absolute;left:0;text-align:left;margin-left:0;margin-top:0;width:46.1pt;height:59.05pt;z-index:251659264;visibility:visible;mso-wrap-style:square;mso-width-percent:0;mso-height-percent:0;mso-wrap-distance-left:9pt;mso-wrap-distance-top:0;mso-wrap-distance-right:9pt;mso-wrap-distance-bottom:0;mso-position-horizontal:center;mso-position-horizontal-relative:text;mso-position-vertical:absolute;mso-position-vertical-relative:text;mso-width-percent:0;mso-height-percent:0;mso-width-relative:page;mso-height-relative:page'>

<v:imagedata src="cid:image001.png@01CED499.53F14A50" o:title="Matson FINAL VERSION one color green tree no box" />

It's a lot uglier than yours. Oh cool I have a gray trailer!

EDITED: 29 Oct 2013 16:55 by SHIELDSIT

0/0

From: graphitone29 Oct 2013 16:55

To: Drew (X3N0PH0N) 4 of 23

40748.4 In reply to 40748.2

Pretty sure - I've resized the original in Photoshop (CS2) going via image-image size-resolution.

If it's not there, then I don't know where to change it. :/

Sticking the rescaled image into the signature editor is what I tried first.

0/0

From: graphitone29 Oct 2013 16:59

To: Ken (SHIELDSIT) 5 of 23

40748.5 In reply to 40748.3

The image is a similar size, I'm using a 75x98px size. What DPI have you got with yours?

Also that code looks freakishly different. Was that generated through an Outlook 2013 sig?

0/0

From: Ken (SHIELDSIT)29 Oct 2013 17:01

To: graphitone 6 of 23

40748.6 In reply to 40748.5

I built the sig in Word because I'm using a table. I had a hell of a time getting it to keep the correct table layout. I'll try to paste what it looks like below. How do I check DPI?

Ken Shields IT Manager
	Street, City, State, Zip
	Phone: Mobile: Fax: Email: www.oursite.com

I hope the border stays, the image is under my name and title.

0/0

From: Ken (SHIELDSIT)29 Oct 2013 17:02

To: ALL7 of 23

40748.7 In reply to 40748.6

Shit the border didn't stay. And it dropped the left cell down. I'll take a screen snip.

EDITED: 29 Oct 2013 17:02 by SHIELDSIT

0/0

From: Ken (SHIELDSIT)29 Oct 2013 17:05

To: ALL8 of 23

Here is the layout. Sorry for the ugly blue lines, I don't need calls about kitchens or bags at work.

Attachments:

Capture.PNG

0/0

From: graphitone29 Oct 2013 17:10

To: Ken (SHIELDSIT) 9 of 23

40748.9 In reply to 40748.6

I've built sigs before in HTML using tables and AD references and might have to revert back to it, 'cos they worked. I just don't get why Outlook insists on a 96dpi image, then buggers about when you provide one.

Just for reference here's what happening:

Signature on the member of staff's PC when creating an email, and how it appears when it comes through to me.

Like you've done, names blocked out as I don't need another barrage of emails in our filters to sort through.

EDITED: 29 Oct 2013 17:14 by GRAPHITONE

Attachments:

0/0

From: Ken (SHIELDSIT)29 Oct 2013 17:30

To: graphitone 10 of 23

40748.10 In reply to 40748.9

I hate trying to figure stupid shit like this out. I don't have an answer for you, but I wish you luck!

0/0

From: graphitone29 Oct 2013 17:37

To: Ken (SHIELDSIT) 11 of 23

40748.11 In reply to 40748.10

Cheers dude.

I'll try building a table type signature and see if that works.

0/0

From: Ken (SHIELDSIT)29 Oct 2013 17:39

To: graphitone 12 of 23

40748.12 In reply to 40748.11

If you can't seem to get it let me know and I'll upload my template for you to try.

0/0

From: Matt29 Oct 2013 18:37

To: graphitone 13 of 23

40748.13 In reply to 40748.4

Resolution does not equal dpi (just in case you're making that mistake)

0/0

From: af (CAER)29 Oct 2013 19:14

To: Matt 14 of 23

40748.14 In reply to 40748.13

I do have to wonder what in the hell Outlook cares about the DPI setting in an image for.

0/0

From: Matt29 Oct 2013 19:17

To: af (CAER) 15 of 23

40748.15 In reply to 40748.14

I think the problem is it doesn't. Or at least some part of it doesn't, while another bit does obey the dpi.

0/0

From: graphitone29 Oct 2013 21:34

To: Matt 16 of 23

40748.16 In reply to 40748.13

There's a setting under that menu that lets you change the pixels per inch.

I've never really thought much about it, but this site gives a fairly comprehensive lecture on the difference between DPI and PPI.

So, as Xen alluded to, how the hell do I check I'm playing with the right numbers?!

0/0

From: Chris (CHRISSS)29 Oct 2013 23:24

To: graphitone 17 of 23

40748.17 In reply to 40748.1

This for Outlook 2010 but may be of help: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/office/forum/office_2010-outlook/how-do-i-stop-microsoft-outlook-2010-from/26058f71-1fc2-4943-9334-d6e9d3bc43c2

;l

;

What's going on with that link!?

Taken from here: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/office/forum/office_2013_release-outlook/outlook-2013-re-sizing-my-96dpi-signature-image-to/ac850718-8ea3-4a0d-b298-e0c877fd7fed where someone tried a 96dpi in 2013 with the same problem you had.

+1/1

From: graphitone29 Oct 2013 23:46

To: Chris (CHRISSS) 18 of 23

40748.18 In reply to 40748.17

Looks like it could be a simple solution if it works. I'll check when I'm back at work on Thursday.

Thanks!

0/0

From: Ken (SHIELDSIT)30 Oct 2013 00:01

To: graphitone 19 of 23

40748.19 In reply to 40748.18

Thursday? You expect us to wait while you enjoy a day off?

0/0

From: CHYRON (DSMITHHFX)30 Oct 2013 00:23

To: graphitone 20 of 23

40748.20 In reply to 40748.1

microsoft is rubbish ever since they switched from ie to word for their outlook html engine. It's been a huge pain in the ass for html email.

0/0