Subject: | [OM] Re: Oh, Digital, Wherefore Art Thou? |
---|---|
From: | "C.H.Ling" <chling@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Fri, 30 Jul 2004 00:03:04 +0800 |
Something looks good on monitor doesn't mean it will print good at the same size, for example you scale down a full frame to 1024x768, it will look very good on a 17" monitor but can you make a 17" (diag.) print (with this 1024x768 file) and still look good? Impossible! Monitor is roughtly 72dip, you need at least 3 times the resolution (>200dpi) to make a good print. C.H.Ling ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walt Wayman" <hiwayman@xxxxxxx> > I'm going to add only two more points to this discussion. > > 1. My monitor is set to a resolution of 1024x768. Measuring the width of the 1/225th portion of the photo I posted as seen on screen at that setting, then doing a little math, shows that if a print were made with the whole enlarged to the same degree as that 494x317 pixel piece, it would be more than 8 feet wide. How well a digital shot would enlarge to an equal size is something I can't speculate upon. I'm sure someone will tell of seeing even larger digital blow-ups that are tack-sharp, grainless and pixelless, with vibrant color and a 3-D appearance that makes them see almost alive. I've got enough NaCl to take a grain or two PRN, so go right ahead. > ============================================== List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx ============================================== |
Previous by Date: | [OM] Re: Warning !! Curmudgeon alert !!, Chris Barker |
---|---|
Next by Date: | [OM] Re: Warning !! Curmudgeon alert !!, Chris Barker |
Previous by Thread: | [OM] Re: Oh, Digital, Wherefore Art Thou?, Walt Wayman |
Next by Thread: | [OM] Re: Oh, Digital, Wherefore Art Thou?, Mike |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |