Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Re: Hello, thanks, and more.

["Rob Geraghty" <harper@wordweb.com>]

"Ken Durling" <kdurling@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> If you're resizing an image from 3000 pixels in the width to
>> 750 pixels, you're throwing away 75% of the data!
> Aha, okay, see my other reply.  I'm slowly coming out of the fog here.
> So what's the most "lossless" way to get my 30MB TIFF file to the size
> I can post on a website with say a 300K limit per image?

It can't be lossless, and you wouldn't want it to be unless you want to give
away high quality images for free.  Most people with a computer (not high
end users) have their screen set to a resolution of 800x600 pixels or less.
More than this for web use and you're wasting your time for the majority of
users.  I try to keep my jpeg files inside 50K for general web use.  You can
make quite reasonably sized images on the screen that as a file are inside
that limit.  Waiting for larger files to download gets boring, and people on
the web tend to have short attention spans.

> To my present understanding, the only points in the workflow that you
> have actual choice of dpi is at the initial scan, and at the final print.

If you're making web images, the dpi for the screen is 72dpi.  End of story.

> When saving as a JPEG, different programs seem to have all
> kinds of different specifications.

There's lots of settings within jpeg format.  Usually the default gives the
best result.

> now, I guess I nedd to figure out what the relationship is between
> file size and image size in regards to JPEGs.

That would be best answered by someone who is using Photoshop Elements,
otherwise I'd be talking settings which would make no sense to you.

Rob