|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
Good morning, Jerry. I intended to say "spi" as samples per inch rather than DPI. Looks like we're just not living in the same world. Based on the URL you provided, I reread the review. I had read it before, just wanted to make sure we were reading the same review. Pam Jerry Olson wrote: > > Not always Pam. A 5 star rating by a leading magazine carries weight. If > the ads say it is a true 1600x3200 resolution it had better be. If they > say in the review that the scans are the highest quality of any > currently available flatbed under $5000, they had better be. Or there > will be lawsuits. The test I read was not at 300 DPI. I imagine we saw > different reviews by different people. I wished I would have saved the > article, but I didn't. > > Pam Niedermayer wrote: > > > > Jerry, in this review the test was to scan an 8X10 photo at > > 300 spi. So it did a great job at 300 spi? I already have a > > 300 spi scanner that does a fine job at 300 spi. Besides, > > you should know by now that computer rag reviewers aren't > > paid enough to do a good job, they simply repeat what's in > > the product literature. > > > > Pam > > -- Pamela G. Niedermayer Pinehill Softworks Inc. 1221 S. Congress Ave., #1225 Austin, TX 78704 512-416-1141 512-416-1440 fax http://www.pinehill.com - Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp] Users