hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
 Navigation
Articles
Gallery of Plants
Blog
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Patents
Mailing Lists
    FAQ
    Netiquette
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
Links
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: Slugger pic


----------
> From: Kitty <kmrsy@comcast.net>
> Thanks.   I'm hoping the photo is large enough to make a decent
8x10.  It's
> a 387 kb jpg.   All other 8x10s have been from 35mm negs.  I assume
a photo
> lab can use a diskette.

Well, Kitty, the image you have up on the web is 480x360 pixels and
would print out at 6.668 x 5".  It is also 72 pixel resolution, which
is less than I usually use for jpg files - 96 is what I use for
monitor viewing.  72 is the resolution for .gif files.  For some
reason, my digital camera (which is older) saves at 72 pixels at
normal high setting...annoying.  There's another higher setting, but
the file size produced is more than my system can handle.

 For printing, you need minimum 150 pixels and 250 or 300 will give
you a better image - print actually doesn't do much beyond 300
pixels.  However, if your camera saves jpgs at 72 pixels as a .jpg
file, you are out of luck because there's just not enough data saved
to increase the pixel level and not get a fuzzy image.

Perhaps you have the original image at a higher resolution or larger
size?  I snatched your web image and stuck it in Photoshop to see
what size it would print at and the resolution and it said it was 
42kb file size, so if your original is 387kb, it must be larger or at
a higher rez....

You are actually better off saving in .tif format if your camera
permits and you want to print out something - if you can handle the
file size - because .tif doesn't compress like .jpg and compression
loses data.

Slides are much higher rez.  When I scan a slide, it's at 2400
pixels, giving me a 15megabyte or more file size.  I have to reduce
those images immediately or my whole system gets indigestion.

> OrangeCat, Orange Kitty - don't we have great imaginations when it
comes to
> pet names?! :+D

Aren't we, tho'?  I mean, our cat's name is Teeny Kitty; previous
cat's name was Cat-cat...how creative can you get?

Marge Talt, zone 7 Maryland
mtalt@hort.net
Editor:  Gardening in Shade
-----------------------------------------------
Current Article: Corydalis
http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/shade_gardening
------------------------------------------------
Complete Index of Articles by Category and Date
http://mtalt.hort.net/article-index.html
------------------------------------------------
All Suite101.com garden topics :
http://www.suite101.com/topics.cfm/635

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Support hort.net -- join the hort.net fund drive!
http://www.hort.net/funds/



Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index



 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement