Re: Scanning Photos

["Darren Yates" <dyates@pnc.com.au>]

Mark,
It's amazing to me just how much you seem to know about everything...
Most scanning programs talk about DPI, not PPI - telling someone to scan in
PPI is meaningless if the program talks about DPI.
If you're so conversant with the whole topic, please tell us all the
difference between PPI and DPI...
Most scanning software comes with preset scanning options for 75, 150,
300dpi.
I was offering advice that would most likely fit the software his/her
scanner is supplied with.
I would rather scan at 150dpi for a better quality image than at 75dpi.
Scanning a 75dpi gives you little room for error when touching up photos.
It's far better to scan at a higher resolution than needed to allow for this
and then resize the image once any editing has been done.


MarkBau1 wrote in message <19990622040257.03943.00001891@ng-cr1.aol.com>...
><<<<<If you're scanning for the web, you certainly don't need any more reso
>than
>150dpi and saving using JPEG even at 60% good quality setting is adequate
>for most photos.>>>>>
>
>This is bad advice. You never need to scan higher than 96 PPI for the web
and
>90% of photo's on the web are at 72PPI. Most monitors can't show more than
>72PPI (some go to 96) so there is absolutely no use in ever scanning higher
>than that UNLESS you want the viewer to download and print the photo, in
which
>case you would probably want more than 150 PPI.
>
>The higher PPI you use the bigger the file so getting PPI right for web
viewing
>is quite important.
>
>BTW, the term DPI should not be used unless you are going to print an
image.
>There are no dots on a computer screen, only pixels, hence the term PIXELS
per
>inch. (Interesting that Australian users use the term "per inch" still.)
>
>Your rule of thumb is also quite misleading, there are many different jpeg
>compression algorithims out there. 60% on one program may produce very
>different quality to 60% on another. A good jpeg compression program like
Adobe
>ImageReady lets me get down to 30% no problems. But if I used 30% with
>PhotoShop's jpeg compression I get an ugly mess.
>
>Mark.
>
>
>Visit my train pic website at:
>http://home.earthlink.net/~markbau/
>
>