Bob Talbot <snapper@st-abbs.fsnet.co.uk> writes: > > One pixel per parsec is **much** better. Think of the ink and paper they > > waste on the first attempt... > Brian > > My answer was aimed at PhotoShop users. > On PS 5.0 9999.99 dpi was the biggest value it would let me enter ;o) No - you want the *smallest* 'pixels-per-distance'. PSP lets me use 1 per cm, which is quite convenient, and would waste quite a bit of ink. > In a windows bmp file resolution is coded as an unsigned long (PelsPerMeter - whatever pels are). Huh? More meaninglessness. "Pel" is (or was) IBM-speak for pixel. Well, 1 per metre should do nicely. > hahahah - maybe I could set them to zero and see if PS can handle the "by zero" error when it tries to print ;o) Bingo! Brian Chandler ---------------- geo://Sano.Japan.Planet_3 Jigsaw puzzles from Japan at: http://imaginatorium.org/shop/
