Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 




      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Re: Hello, thanks, and more.

Ken wrote:
>Hold on - thanks to you all, maybe I DO understand this.  If scanned
>at 72 dpi, even a 4x6 print would need quite a bit of interpolation to
>get it up to a good screen size, ergo crap.    Is that correct?

6"x4" at 72dpi gives you 432 x 238 pixels.  That's half of an 800x600 pixel
screen.  Define "good screen size". :)  I think what most people are saying
is that it's easier to resample to a smaller number of pixels and get a
good result than it is to resample to a larger size.  Averaging (or whatever
;) pixels is easier than inventing them. :)

Remember a lot of people in the world still run their computers in 640x480
or even less in the case of some Macs.  So a "good screen size" on your
computer might be hard to work with on someone else's.  Then again - it
depends on your expected market!


Rob Geraghty harper@wordweb.com


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.