Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
No, I do take your point about articles v forum posts. However I think you're the "ignorant sod" as you misread the ePz article then call the first sentence "pure *****" without taking into account the line above and that the article is about PPI v DPI so it's going to be about images made of pixels. There's nothing wrong with the article.
I think I'm right to point out that you are actually guilty of coming out with "pure *****" with your "72" opinion as if it's a fact which people will find when they Google and will take notice of because they mistake you as being experienced in the matter and will wrongly assume that you know what you're talking about.
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
Chris - I see what you mean now about that table.
The way I readi it I though it was showing 'if you want have this number of pixels, this is the size you can print.". But from your explanation it is actually saying "if you want this size print this is the minimum number of pixels you need".
As I said in my previous post: if it is not clear then it is not properly explained/presented.
But I will repeat that that table makes no reference to dpi because that is intrinsic to the print quality. Again it is misleading.
So you have still not changed my opinion that it needs to be re-written to make it easier for the audience for which it was intended to understand.
I don't think guy understands
That's the best post on this thread Pete.
Paws per inch?
One of mine sleeps in the output tray of the printer - unfortunately it is networked so you don't always realise there is a cat in there when you start to print
Gosh, Pete - that left jab, followed by the right hook!
Is his name 'Henry', by any chance?
Quote: So you have still not changed my opinion that it needs to be re-written to make it easier for the audience for which it was intended to understand.
Mike that's totally fair. We can agree that the article isn't wrong per se but might be misinterpreted. I think the addition of just a few words in the right places would clarify things?
e.g. The sentence "Images are made from pixels" becomes "Digital images are made from pixels".
Yes the table doesn't make any reference to dpi, (if you actually mean ppi then it's inherent in my opinion) - if you have a 3000 x 3000 pixel image and you print it at 10 inches by 10 inches it has to be printed at 300 pixels per inch
If you're actually talking about dpi, not ppi, then I think you might have missed some points in the article.
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
01/09/2014 - 30/09/2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View September's Photo Month Calendar