Robert, Agreed. I was hoping that there would be a somewhat subjective approach possible. So if you enlarge an image that looks OK on one's monitor to some degree to a point where loss of quality is obviously significant and one starts to see pixelation one could roughly state that if that image is printed at a final size that is maybe 10% of the size on the screen it would be OK ... anything larger would be questionable at best. Or something like that. Part of this has to do with the fact I am preparing a booklet and I have images that way exceed the "rule" and others that are borderline or less. I can't enlarge the latter as much on my screen as the former without seeing pixelation. But they both should reproduce OK since they meet or exceed specs. But if the prints were reproduced larger then all bets would be off of course. I had thought about the screen "resolution" as well but this tends not to be widely variable among most home computers ... maybe 90 ppi max or something. I agree that a "test" procedure involving perception and printing etc. would be the way to go but that sounds like too much work right now ... maybe in the winter months! But I doubt it! cheers, andy
