"Emily L. Ferguson" <elf@cape.com> writes: > There's always some loss in JPEG compression. If you have a choice > it's always best to capture in RAW or Tiff format, but I don't have a > digital so I don't really know anything about it except that with the > pro digitals it's possible to choose and that most newspaper shooters > are capturing in RAW mode. True. > Once you get the image into photoshop ... Once you get the image into Photoshop, you enter a world of fantastic nonsense, of mythical "inches", and ethereal paper that doesn't exist. > Now, for the gallery your optimal size is nearly always 72 dpi No. For the gallery the optimal size is a size. A size, of an image, is a number of pixels by a number of pixels. Around 300 x 500 to 400 x 600. > So there's never any point in sending a file to the gallery any > bigger than 96 at the most. Nonsense. All the images I send to the gallery have pixels which are 1 parsec by 1 parsec. My images are sized on the scale of our galaxy, and yet no-one has ever complained they can't view them properly, because the image size is appropriate for the screen. > like happened this cycle. So you need to size your image around > 4"x6" at 96 or 72 dpi so we can all see it and comment on it. No you don't. You need to follow the guidelines, which I believe have been brought into the rational world, and say something similar to what I said above about pixel sizes. > And > you need to re-jpeg the file your going to submit so that it's tiny > and transmits quickly through the phone lines of the internet. Yes, that you do. Sorry, but this "inch" gibberish gets up my nose. Brian Chandler ---------------- geo://Sano.Japan.Planet_3 Jigsaw puzzles from Japan at: http://imaginatorium.org/shop/
