Bob Whitmire wrote:
> I have no idea as to the magazine editor's depth of sophistication in re
> resolution, whether she knows this stuff, or is just repeating what the art
> department tells her. I'll try to find out, but I guess the smart thing to
> do is give her what she asks for, so that when her software displays
> resolution, it will show 300 dpi.
This resolution stuff seems to boil down to a mathematical equation:
Physical length on the page (times) DPI (equals) Pixels.
or
Pixels (divided by) Physical length on the page (equals) DPI
What The editor has told you is one part of the equation. You need at
least one more. Probably the easiest for the editor to supply will be
the size the photo will be printed at. Once you have a physical length,
just multiply it by the 300 dpi she wants and you'll know how many
pixels you will need.
Note: The above illustration only takes length into consideration. It's
the same thing all over again for height.
Thanks, Steve Goss, Dallas Tx usa
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|