Re: Resolution and print quality

[Kennedy McEwen <rkm@kennedym.demon.co.uk>]

<x-flowed>In article <003701c20af4$f6fe8ad0$26877ad5@home1>, Bob Frost 
<bobfrost@btopenworld.com> writes
>
>However, in deciding how much to sharpen an image, one consideration that is
>not mentioned very frequently is the viewing distance. If an image is to be
>viewed from 10-20 feet away, it will withstand and need (in my opinion) more
>sharpening than one that is to be viewed from 6 inches.
>
IMO, sharpening is a process to compensate for losses in the image 
capture and reproduction process, to return the image to a closer 
approximation of 'reality'.  Consequently, images which are viewed at a 
distance should, in principle, require LESS sharpening, because they 
already approach the ideal with the finest details being just resolvable 
and the limitations of the capture process invisible in any case.

One of the main reasons for making an image large to be viewed at a 
distance is that it appears to have the same spatial spectrum content as 
a real scene, governed only by the limitations of your eyes, otherwise 
you might as well make it suitable for viewing at the normal 10" relaxed 
close viewing distance.  Sharpening such an image makes it look false 
and synthetic, and I would guess that this is exactly the sort of effect 
that Harvey (and myself!) finds objectionable.
-- 
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers
-
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.

</x-flowed>