ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: Understanding dpi



Laurie Solomon wrote:
 >
 >I think that he was asking more about if this causes an increase in the
 >image size and not the file size; but I could be wrong.

Yes I was talking about image size. All I really wanted to know was if a
4000ppi scanner was capable of producing a better outputted image quality
than one at only half the ppi? All other things being equal, including
image size. I have a little $300 Scan Dual III right now & I don't need
large images (just 400 x 600 pixels), but I would like a sharper image.
Would a 4000-5000ppi ($1000-$2000) scanner be able to do that with the same
400 x 600 pixel output image size? Specs never seem to talk about image
quality, only ppi.

Thanks,
Bill


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.