correct PSI
Dec 1, 2012 16:35:56 #
Dec 1, 2012 17:19:52 #
dspoon2 wrote:
Is 240 psi best for shots that will be put on a web site?
If an image is posted on a website, you don't need anything more than the resolution of a computer monitor (unless the image has the ability to be enlarged). So, typically, all you need is a resolution of 72-90 pixels per inch (ppi). 240-300 ppi is appropriate for printing.
Dec 1, 2012 17:34:20 #
Wabbit
Loc: Arizona Desert
dspoon2 wrote:
Is 240 psi best for shots that will be put on a web site?
Hey Doc ..... not sure about a web site but 240 psi sure will blow up most tires .....
Dec 2, 2012 01:12:40 #
Dec 2, 2012 01:21:28 #
dspoon2 wrote:
Is 240 psi best for shots that will be put on a web site?
Don't know about pounds per square inch, but the PPI number is meaningless for web use. All that matters is pixel dimension.
Boy, how many times do we need to repeat this. 72, 45, 346, 837, PPI will all look the same on the screen if the number of pixels is constant. So something around 600x400 works well and that is the only number that matters. Forget the PPI myth.
No matter how many people tell you that it should be 72PPI, they are all wrong.
Dec 2, 2012 02:23:26 #
lighthouse
Loc: No Fixed Abode
CaptainC wrote:
quote=dspoon2 Is 240 psi best for shots that will... (show quote)
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Dec 2, 2012 07:19:12 #
CaptainC wrote:
Somebody needs to explain this truism to our folks in Washington. ...No matter how many people tell you that it should be 72PPI, they are all wrong.
And I can't think of anyone more candid and stoic than our esteemed CaptainC!
Dec 2, 2012 09:11:35 #
CaptainC wrote:
quote=dspoon2 Is 240 psi best for shots that will... (show quote)
CaptainC, with all due respect, size does matter - at least when it comes to pixels per inch (ppi) on a computer monitor. I'm attaching two files - one saved at 90ppi and other at 10ppi. I agree with you that it doesn't matter how large the image size is above 72 (e.g., 346 or 837 ppi) when viewing it on a monitor because the monitor can only see a maximum resolution of 72-90 ppi. But, the monitor can certainly see a lesser resolution.
90 ppi
10 ppi (~640x400)
Dec 2, 2012 11:42:09 #
Dec 2, 2012 11:44:55 #
thanks Cliff..25 years of working with oxygen tanks caused my poor adled brain to tell my fat little fingers to type PSI instead of PPI.....duh
Dec 2, 2012 11:52:05 #
DavidT wrote:
quote=CaptainC quote=dspoon2 Is 240 psi best for... (show quote)
I will bet you the pixel dimension is different. What I have stated is correct ALL that matters is pixel dimension. PPI is meaningless.
See my later post - I can agree with the 10- but it is the 72 that everyone thinks is the "answer."
Dec 2, 2012 12:04:00 #
dspoon2 wrote:
Is 240 psi best for shots that will be put on a web site?
Apparently, you're still using the old pneumatic web system. Most have us have moved on to electricity. I think 240 psi is a little on the high side. Try 330. :D
Dec 2, 2012 12:11:36 #
DavidT wrote:
quote=CaptainC quote=dspoon2 Is 240 psi best for... (show quote)
I agree if you go to a ridiculous 10, but the silly myth is that 72PPI is necessary for sending to the web and that it will prevent printing. JUST making an image 72PPI does very little in the limiting printing area and is of NO consequence for screen display.
Dec 2, 2012 14:09:28 #
jerryc41 wrote:
Apparently I'm still not using the new math. dspoon2 wrote:
Apparently, you're still using the old pneumatic web system. Most have us have moved on to electricity. I think 240 psi is a little on the high side. Try 330. :DIs 240 psi best for shots that will be put on a web site?
If 240 is on the high side, then why should I try a higher number like 330?
Shouldn't I try something lower? :roll:
Dec 2, 2012 16:39:23 #
CaptainC wrote:
quote=DavidT quote=CaptainC quote=dspoon2 Is 24... (show quote)
My answer was in response to the OP's question about using 240 ppi for webshots to which I was stating (perhaps, poorly) that there is no need for such a high ppi image when all one needs is 72 ppi to ensure good image quality on the web. I agree 10 ppi is ridiculously low, but I'm not sure where one starts to see degradation of the image quality (e.g., 60 ppi? 40 ppi? 20 ppi?).
Truce.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.