|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
OK, I'm not a theoritician (nor a beautician)...but, I have two 24X prints of the same slide, done on the same large format printer (an old 4 color one) using the same inkset and paper. One print is very much more "photographic" than the other, looks like a grainy photo from a normal viewing distance...the other print needs to be viewed from about 3 feet to look "photo". The difference...is the scanner. One was done on a desktop scanner (3175 ppi), the other on an old, literally big as a truck drum scanner, by a guy who really knows how to use it. I don't know the ppi of that drum scan, but on the print it appears under a loupe to be about double the desktop scan...so, probably in the 6K-8K range. This is a difference you can see. on 06/09/2002 06:13 PM, Kennedy McEwen at firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: > All in all, you have to work damned hard to justify sampling at more > than 4kppi, but there is no justification for sampling at 40kppi. - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.