RE: filmscanners: Puzzled about display resolution

["Austin Franklin" <austin@darkroom.com>]

The right tools for the job.  Having a 'resolution' of at least 1280x1024 is
not untypical for most people who do image editing.  In fact, I'd bet most
on this list have 1600 x 1200.

You can buy a decent monitor for around $400 (the one I am using now for
most of my image editing I paid $375 for...it's a Hitachi 802U
SuperScan...and is damn good).  Video cards are around $100 that support
this kind of resolution...

Unless you are using a notebook, which is a horrible image editing
environment anyway...you really might want to consider upgrading your
monitor/video card.

This is like saying programmers should limit their program size so they can
fit on floppies...or something like that...  Do you at least have a CD ROM
drive?

> Well if you think you're puzzled, I'm really puzzled.  Why would
> anyone use
> anything but the highest resolution available for scanning and viewing
> images created with high resolution devices such as filmscanners.

> > >I'm sure we're all using at least 1280X1024 and so there is enough
> > >real-estate so that the tabs won't overflow.
> >
> > I use 1024x768.
> >
> > This is the second message I have read in 3 minutes where the
> author, who
> > has probably never met any of the other Vuescan users, has made a
> definitive
> > statement about how those people use Vuescan and how they have their
> > computer set-up.  I guess if these two messages had of been
> correct then I
> > would have been impressed by the omniscience of the authors but
> since they
> > were both wrong then I am just puzzled.