Picture size

"Grumpy AuContraire" wrote in message
news


§qu@re Wheels wrote:

On this particular day of this month, in the Year Of The Golden Pig, P &
H Macguire did state:


I am in the process of scanning some old slides of 60s to 90s and
wondered what the optimum size should be for posting on this N/G. They
will be scanned at about 300dpi.

Regards

PJM


Absolutely scan at 300dpi or even more. You can always reduce (dpi, size,
etc.) but no matter what, no matter how a pic is, enlarging more than 25%
is useless and there is much quality degradation.

Avoid 72 dpi like unto the plague. That was a semi-arbitrary resolution
based on the early browsers that could not display more than that, and
the
palettes were also fewer than 256 colours. Those were the old days.
And today's monitors, both LCD and CRT, can display even more than 300
dpi, and do it well.


Please list monitors (any) that display higher resolution than 72 dpi.

My monitor is an Apple Mac 23" (running on a PC) and it has 1920 X 1200.
The vertical dimension is 12" So about 100dpi.

My Sony VAIO notebook has 1920 X 1200 and the screen is 9" high. That's 133
dpi.

There are two issues. Scanning for archive and then the (reduced) size for
posting.

When I scan a slide I do it for archiving and I use 4800. Even that doesn't
do the slide its full credit. For archival, you also need to consider the
colour depth. 48 bit is great for a slide, but normal jpg will only save 32
bit. There is a higher depth jpeg (jpeg2000, I think) but I don't use it.
It's a rare format and I don't trust trust it to supported in 20 years time.

If you do scan a slide at 72 dpi, then you will have an image that is
roughly 72 X 72. Almost unusable.

Regards


snip