Digital BW, The Print

Nothing at all bogus about my argument, but your comments illustrate my
point exactly.

Why should I tell anyone what paper and inks I used.  If I am showing an
image, who cares if it was printed using piezo inks on an Epson 3000 or the
watered down oil from my car and drawn with a needle and lots of patience.
Damn right, as long as the image is appreciated and conveys the message I
intended, who cares.

 <<<< --- not surprised that would be your position since you are using a
> flatbed..>>>>

..not surprised that your position would differ if you spent thousands on
your scanner.  I guess it must be painful to think that others can match
visible (normal viewing) quality up to a certain size of print for a few
thousand less.  My position is based upon currently using a flatbed and a
Flextight Photo, and doing some detailed comparisons of my own.

I try not to crop too much after the image is taken but, yes, when necessary
I do crop.  I can easily get a 360dpi A3+ print from a cropped 6X6 scanned
at 3200.  If I had to crop a 6X6 any  more than that to get a usable image
then I just didn't get it right to start with.  Given that I rarely go above
A3+ I need no more.

You seem to have got hung up on the fact that I mentioned 4000ppi.  My
comment applies to anyone scanning at any resolution.

I guess you will continue to scrutinise you scans in minute detail.  Enjoy,

Simon

On 18/3/03 12:19 am, "Editor P.O.V. Image Service" <editor@...>
wrote:

> 
> BOGUS ARGUMENT ALERT!
> 
> 
> Simon Lamb wrote:
> 
>>  I absolutely guarantee that if I do not tell anyone which
>> is which, 99% of the general viewing public wouldn¹t have the faintest idea,
>> nor would they care.
>> 
> Hmmm.. 99% wouldn't know what inks or paper you used if you didn't tell
> them either.. In that case, by your argument, we should be using the
> 1270 OEM inks and printing on photocopy paper, as long as the public
> likes and appreciates the image..
> 
> Sorry, that's just wrongheaded.
> 
>> This retentive nature about ultimate sharpness is really just too much.  Who
>> cares, certainly not anyone except those who scan an image at 4000ppi, blow
>> it up to 100% and then start looking at edge definition, colour fringing and
>> Rultimate sharpness¹  For pete¹s sake, it won¹t even show on a 22X22, let
>> alone a 12X12 ort 10X8!
>>  
>> 
> <<<< --- not surprised that would be your position since you are using a
> flatbed..
> 
> I assume you do all your cropping in camera too? Because if you are
> going to crop an image, having a 4000 dpi scan makes a BIG difference.
> 
>> The only exception I would make to this is large prints and fine art prints
>> for sale or exhibition, where someone may well look at the fine detail.  As
>> I do neither I am happy with the 3200, as most people would be if they work
>> at it and get the most from it.
>>  
>> 
> Or if you intend to crop...
> 
> 
> 
> Keith