If everyone would use ppi for image resolution and leave dpi to printer
resolution it would eliminate a major confusion factor. Even the author's
of books interchange them indiscriminately.
BTW, I have put a couple of images on pbase at:
http://www.pbase.com/pelaughlin/sadie
These are of my neighbor's dog, taken with an Oly C2100 UZ camera. The
first one is out of the camera. The second has been cropped and resized to
12" x 18" at 200 ppi. I printed it on an Epson 1270 and it came out nice.
At least to my eye. VBG The C2100 UZ is a 1.92 Megapixel camera. I just
bring this up as an example of how it is not all a matter of megapixels.
Paul in Portland OR
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Norcutt" <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 12:26 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] how many megapixels here?
> You have fallen victim to the printer manufacturer's marketing wars with
> respect to the resolution of their printers. The dpi they're referring
> to there is the size of smallest dot that can be produced of any one
> color. Actual pixel representations on paper are composed of multiple
> printer ink dots comprising multiple colors and it takes a bunch of them
> to build up one pixel's worth. If you're printing with an image
> resolution of 300 dpi and at best photo resolution of 1400 dpi the
> printer has near 5 (1400/300) dot positions where it can lay down
> multiple tiny ink dots to build that one pixel (or dot since it's now on
> the paper)
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|