On 03/28/14 10:25, Tim wrote:
Tim:
When you mis-set the DPI, you lose the ability for applications to
show "actual size" objects. Such as graphics designers, or desktop
publishers, who want to design something with real-world
measurements (i.e. centimeters, not pixels), and have the program
show it at life size on their monitor. Which it can do, when DPI is
set right, as the physical size of the monitor screen is known, the
pixels across and down it, and what DPI it uses.
g:
i do not know what correlations of 'dots per' are in centimeters,
but i do know that with what they are in inches.
Fair enough, I should have stuck with one measurement system, and
> just mentioned inches as a real-world measurement.
this is true. but considering that this land that i live in has
finally come to its senses and admitted that the britt's did have
one thing right, ie, a metric system, divisible by 10. at least
our medical and pharmaceutical industry had insight to maintain in
a base 10 world.
in inches, dpi does not lend towards getting "actual size", only
close, as in horse shoes, hand grenade, and nuclear bombs.
I refute that. If you know that your device has a specific DPI, and
> the actual size of the screen (the active part of it), you can get a
> very good rendition of something drawn at 1:1 scale on the device.
> Screen, printer, whatever.
with better understanding of what i mean by close, how do any of the
dpi's relate properly, or evenly, to a fraction of an inch which, for
practical reasons, say 1/32 or 1/64 of an inch. think about it. then
try to relate to a decimal value.
current dpi figures just do not work.
[
some interesting links of correlations:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dpi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_%28mathematics%29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_dimension_%28disambiguation%29
]
e.g. If I want to print something on paper 1 inch square on a 600
> DPI printer, the rendering engine makes it 600 dots across in both
directions. And I can do the exact same thing on screen, the
> numbers involved are different, of course, but the math is the same.
> Knowing the screen size and DPI, it can create the right number of
> dots.
correct.
i consed with a fact that when i first read your post, i was thinking
more so to a crt type monitor and not the evermore present digital
screen. which is closer, tho still plagued by 3 colour dots, which
themselves lead to a _slight_ form of irregularity in rendering,
depending on colours being presented.
It's not just a case of being able to show graphics at a specific
> real world size that's important, either.
no. but it sure would be nice. ;-)
And as I mentioned the first time around, since different things
> manage rendering in different ways, you want them all scaling from
> the same starting point.
also, very true.
yet, it is a debate that could go on forever and why i will end with
this and await your reply.
--
peace out.
in a world with out fences, who needs gates.
tc.hago.
g
.
--
users mailing list
users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
