Google| Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
| From | Floyd L. Davidson |
| Date | 09/19/2014 22:02 (09/19/2014 12:02) |
| Message-ID | <87r3z7tm3g.fld@barrow.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Sandman |
| Followups | Sandman (15h & 23m) |
Sandman <mr@sandman.net>wrote:
SandmanThe only one who said anything about "saved for an image file" is YOU! I guess you think that is significant, which makes you "adorable" in the same sense that a nice warm puppy is.
In article <87vbojttf4.fld@barrow.com>, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:Sandmannospam
In article <bc792678-99f5-4416-8002-0d75afbeadf2@googlegroups.com>,Floyd L. DavidsonWhisky-davenospam
Do you happen to know whether or not this preview file is a copy of the original file but 'rendered' at 72DPI rather than the final copy which is mostly likely to be 300+ DPI for printing ?
there is no dpi or more accurately ppi until you print. everything is always done to the original image.
Until you print... or display an image on a monitor screen. Same thing, and a different value for DPI/PPI.
Now Floyd thinks the DPI information saved for an image file is in any way related to the physical PPI of the screen. Isn't he adorable?
The fact is that the physical screen, just like a physical printer, has a set PPI that it works at. The software displaying the image determines exactly what that is and resamples the image accordingly.
The statement "no dpi or more accurately ppi until you print" is not true. Everything that relates to printing is also just exactly the same with displaying an image on a monitor screen.
-- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com
09/13/2014-
