Set the DPI for your screen regardless of what folks say here. (PS CC and likely many other software)
Apr 12, 2021 11:28:31 #
RWebb76 wrote:
All of this is interesting. I am surprised there is controversy over what is most certainly established science...kinda like the earth is round (maybe?). Perhaps an article by an established authority to review for us ill informed?
Particularly one that shows the simple math of how many dots are in a pixel.
Apr 12, 2021 11:32:50 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
How many dots are in a pixel?
How many buckets are in an orange when it is filled with oranges?
You look really stupid here.
Apr 12, 2021 11:37:54 #
Heather Iles
Loc: UK, Somerset
Rongnongno wrote:
How many buckets are in an orange when it is filled with oranges?
You look really stupid here.
You look really stupid here.
Tut, tut, tut!
Apr 12, 2021 11:39:17 #
Rongnongno wrote:
How many buckets are in an orange when it is filled with oranges?
You look really stupid here.
You look really stupid here.
You're the one who asked about obsessions just last week. And then you start preaching about more internet myths just a few days later. Really, if there was a relationship between printer dots and digital pixels, surely by April 12, 2021, in the entire history of the world, someone would now be able to express what the relationship is.
Unless, of course, there isn't one.
Apr 12, 2021 11:44:48 #
Given this DPI topic never seems to go away, one might think an expensive printer like the $799.99 Epson SureColor P700 13-inch Photo Printer would be concerned about DPI, right? I downloaded the 179-page PDF User Manual and text-searched 'dpi'. It occurs in the entire document just twice. And even then, it's a confusing topic related to Grainy Printout and they mention a possible error in the digital editor used to create the file.
Surely a large company like Epson, with all their engineers, who manufacture a product like the $799.99 Epson SureColor P700, that company must be concerned about DPI, right? If DPI was important, just maybe?
Occam didn't have a time machine, but he left us the idea that a simpler explanation for this Epson conundrum is that DPI doesn't apply to printing pixel-based images.
Surely a large company like Epson, with all their engineers, who manufacture a product like the $799.99 Epson SureColor P700, that company must be concerned about DPI, right? If DPI was important, just maybe?
Occam didn't have a time machine, but he left us the idea that a simpler explanation for this Epson conundrum is that DPI doesn't apply to printing pixel-based images.
Apr 12, 2021 11:46:58 #
Heather Iles wrote:
Tut, tut, tut!
Sorry but when some ***** person asks the same idiotic question there is only one possible answer after a time.
Apr 12, 2021 11:53:57 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
You're the one who asked about obsessions just last week. And then you start preaching about more internet myths just a few days later. Really, if there was a relationship between printer dots and digital pixels, surely by April 12, 2021, in the entire history of the world, someone would now be able to express what the relationship is.
Unless, of course, there isn't one.
Unless, of course, there isn't one.
SO WHY IS ADOBE OFFERING A PRINT PRE-VIEWING OPTION?
Same as why adobe is offering a real pixel display view? To specifically irate you?
Just asking.
Oh, yeah, to be able to predict what the printer output will be.
Nothing difficult to understand, really but by a few die hard who just do not want to understand the practical use of it and pollute people's mind with false concepts and ideas.
To display a print preview the software must know the display PPI to start with.
People once were sure the earth was flat. It took time to correct that. Now there are still die hard folks who still insist the earth is flat and the curvature seen in the horizon is just plain optical illusion.
Apr 12, 2021 11:58:09 #
As to my post about adjusting an image for better preview...
Left: UHH reduced
Right: reduced for UHH use
You can save each image and then compare.
Having the real view helps when the image is greater than the display but then again, this has no use either, right?
Left: UHH reduced
Right: reduced for UHH use
You can save each image and then compare.
Having the real view helps when the image is greater than the display but then again, this has no use either, right?
Apr 12, 2021 12:01:57 #
Rongnongno wrote:
As to my post about adjusting an image for better preview...
Left: UHH reduced
Right: reduced for UHH use
You can save each image and then compare.
Having the real view helps when the image is greater than the display but then again, this has no use either, right?
Left: UHH reduced
Right: reduced for UHH use
You can save each image and then compare.
Having the real view helps when the image is greater than the display but then again, this has no use either, right?
What is there to compare from an thumbnail? That's like "I'm thinking of a number, can you guess the value?"
Why don't you attach the file? If you print these, what you going to do, not touch it, not look closely? Take a picture of the picture and say that's what it looks like?
Apr 12, 2021 12:06:53 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
Lots of words ,,,, but where is the simple answer to the simple question:
How many dots fit in a pixel?
How many dots fit in a pixel?
I always thought that 73 angels could sit on the head of a pin. But I might be wrong.
Apr 12, 2021 12:11:46 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
What is there to compare from an thumbnail? That's like "I'm thinking of a number, can you guess the value?"
Why don't you attach the file? If you print these, what you going to do, not touch it, not look closely? Take a picture of the picture and say that's what it looks like?
Why don't you attach the file? If you print these, what you going to do, not touch it, not look closely? Take a picture of the picture and say that's what it looks like?
Well, you just ended the discussion with you by another less than intelligent answer.
There is no correct way to explain what light is to a blind person, especially if the person is not blind but obtuse.
Apr 12, 2021 12:16:17 #
Rongnongno wrote:
Well, you just ended the discussion with you by another less than intelligent answer.
There is no correct way to explain what light is to a blind person, especially if the person is not blind but obtuse.
There is no correct way to explain what light is to a blind person, especially if the person is not blind but obtuse.
What are you trying to show? Use your words, like a grown up. Present your examples in a downloadable fashion, like a serious person trying to have serious discussion.
Apr 12, 2021 12:17:53 #
srg wrote:
I always thought that 73 angels could sit on the head of a pin. But I might be wrong.
That may be more accurate than dots in a pixel, but maybe you have access to that ratio too?
Apr 12, 2021 12:46:26 #
Rongnongno wrote:
b This is a false narrative that has spread for t... (show quote)
"The only time one can ignore PPI is when an image is posted on the web."
This statement is clearly not true. I have been ignoring it for 20 years. It has no relevance to my photography work. In Lr there is a print resolution setting in ppi. Many years ago I set it to 300. That is the only ppi setting I have ever encountered in my photography life (shooting, pp, printing, emailing, drop boxing) and I never touch it.
I think you might be over thinking this and getting mired in things that don't make any difference.
...Cam
Apr 12, 2021 13:02:28 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.