Re: What We've Learned

[JoeMead@aol.com]

In a message dated 10/29/2000 9:22:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
rafeb@channel1.com writes:

> nteresting point, Steve, though I'm not sure I 
>  completely agree.  Oh, I've learned a lot about 
>  different papers and inks, Epson models I don't 
>  own (or can't afford,) software tools that don't 
>  work, ferrets, vodka, windex, orange-shift, Macs, 
>  Firewire, quadtones, and a gazillion alternative 
>  ways of doing anything Epson-related.

Rafe
(This is Joe not Steve talking)
Maybe a better word for what I'm talking about is sensitivity.  For example, 
in the beginning I just sharpened.  Then one day I got sensitive to the fact 
that I was degrading light blue skies with thin clouds.  The degradation was 
there all the time, I just wasn't sensitive to it. Now I see this kind of 
stuff and eliminate it routinely.  What I'm concerned about is where is 
something going on that I'm not sensitive to?  One year from today, what is 
it that I will say "boy was I dumb back in those days -- it is so easy to see 
xxxx now." If I could just fill in the xxxx's I'd feel more comfortable.

By the way, thanks for your opinion on DPI vs. resampling.  Yours and other 
peoples observations make me believe what I thought -- the Epson will handle 
non-sixty DPI's better than resampling in Photoshop to get to a desired image 
size. From now on, I'm selecting DPI to get the right image size and let the 
resampling go.  Hope this isn't XXXX.

JoeMead 
-
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.