This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters
Home > Archive > PainShop Pro Scripting > August 2006 > Articles/pages on ppi, was Re: FrostyRusty Outlines Script
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Articles/pages on ppi, was Re: FrostyRusty Outlines Script
|
|
|
| Sally Beacham wrote:
> "Joske" wrote:
[color=darkred]
> Here's much of the issue presented in scrapbook terms -
>
http://www.digitalscrapbookplace.co...icles/ppi.shtml
> This article is very good in "common sense" terms for
> non-scrappers -
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1790570,00.asp
> 300 PPI isn't so much "hogwash" as it is unnecessary for "the
> masses." If layouts were going to be printed at full size on an
> offset printer (such as might be needed for magazine layouts)
> then it would be necessary (probably.)
Hmm. Just the 'but' some might come up with :-)
> However - layouts are
> NEVER printed that way, and unless a person is planning on having
> their personal albums printed in that manner (which no one would
> do unless they had money just burning holes in their pockets) the
> higher resolution is not necessary.
> The problem lies in the large file sizes created by the higher
> resolution images. The scrapping community in general is often
> working on older, less powerful computers, and many issues are
> avoided by working with smaller file sizes. Storage needs are
> less, online downloads are less of a burden if the file sizes are
> smaller (and you know how large print-quality scrapbook paper
> files can be.) Couple that with a general lack of computer and
> graphic knowledge and expertise in the community, and you have
> lots of people struggling to do basic tasks when they don't need
> to be. It's an unnecessary burden on the new scrapper, in
> particular, who just wants to create some layouts.
I fully understand the filesize problem (also in regards to full
bg's and ribbons as opposed to segments or fills). It's the
explaining. I couldn't get access to the article, but I read the
whole page on dsp. Good, thanks very much for the links. I think I
will link to it somewhere on my pages with scrap things, am assuming
this would be okay with them.
Oh ps: if I would want to link to your article (mentioned in the dsp
one), would that be okay too?
Joske
| |
| Sally Beacham 2006-08-03, 7:54 pm |
| On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 19:06:21 +0200, "Joske" <j.backer@home.nl> wrote:
>Sally Beacham wrote:
>
>
>
>http://www.digitalscrapbookplace.co...icles/ppi.shtml
>
>
>
>Hmm. Just the 'but' some might come up with :-)
"But" - it would never happen. Don't know if you've ever seen a
scrapbook magazine, but no magazine would ever be able to print a
full-size 12x12 layout. They usually end up being shown at a print
size of 2-4 inches. I had a layout requested for a national magazine
which was designed at 100 PPI. I resampled it to 300 PPI and didn't
change a darn thing. They assumed it was a smaller layout for a small
album. If they even thought about it at all. ;-)))).
>
>
>
>I fully understand the filesize problem (also in regards to full
>bg's and ribbons as opposed to segments or fills). It's the
>explaining. I couldn't get access to the article, but I read the
>whole page on dsp. Good, thanks very much for the links. I think I
>will link to it somewhere on my pages with scrap things, am assuming
>this would be okay with them.
>
You can't get the PC Magazine link? Someone else told me that, but it
comes up fine for me here... hmmmmmm...
>Oh ps: if I would want to link to your article (mentioned in the dsp
>one), would that be okay too?
Yep, no problem. I have a related concept I am working on, we might
want to bounce it around off-list.
Sally Beacham
>
>Joske
>
| |
|
| Sally Beacham wrote:
> "Joske" wrote:
http://www.digitalscrapbookplace.co...icles/ppi.shtml
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1790570,00.asp
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> You can't get the PC Magazine link? Someone else told me that,
> but it comes up fine for me here... hmmmmmm...
Still no go on this side.
[color=darkred]
> Yep, no problem. I have a related concept I am working on, we
> might want to bounce it around off-list.
Thanks. When the bouncing has been done sufficiently, I hope you'll
show us all the ball :-)
Joske
| |
|
|
| Spandex Rutabaga 2006-08-03, 7:54 pm |
| Joske wrote:
>
> Sally Beacham wrote:
>
> Still no go on this side.
I click on it and it works just fine for me. Perhaps the link
has a built-in vegetable sensor.
| |
| Sally Beacham 2006-08-03, 7:54 pm |
| On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 14:57:52 -0500, Spandex Rutabaga
<SpRu@agabatur.xednaps> wrote:
>Joske wrote:
>
>
>I click on it and it works just fine for me. Perhaps the link
>has a built-in vegetable sensor.
Well, I WAS once called a Hot Tomato in my younger days...
Sally Beacham
| |
| Barbara J Bradley 2006-08-03, 7:54 pm |
|
"JoeB" <myemail@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns98148DAAE268DJoeB@216.191.232.194...
> "Joske" <j.backer@home.nl> wrote in news:44d24f9c$1_1@cnews:
>
>
> It doesn't work for me either if I click the link in the post.
> However, if I copy the link to clipboard and paste in IE it works
> fine. Strange, but true here.
>
> Regards,
>
> JoeB
I click on the link and it works here.
Barb
| |
| Patricia 2006-08-03, 11:17 pm |
| [color=darkred]
>
> You can't get the PC Magazine link? Someone else told me that, but it
> comes up fine for me here... hmmmmmm...
>
>
> Yep, no problem. I have a related concept I am working on, we might
> want to bounce it around off-list.
>
> Sally Beacham
>
>
The link has always worked for me. I have it bookmarked as well...Pat
| |
|
| <snip>
>
> You can't get the PC Magazine link? Someone else told me that, but it
> comes up fine for me here... hmmmmmm...
>
</snip>
Make sure your favorite browser is set to "Enable Access to this program."
Hint: Look under Start>Set Program Access and Defaults.
|
|
|
| | Copyright 2003 - 2009 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |
|