Enlarging pictures

twgreen3 said:
... before sending to wallgreens.

OK... here's my reasoning: I made the presumption that the least amount of resultion would be 254 DPI, say... like a Durst Epsilon. I figure the Frontier is likely to be 300, although some models are at 320. So, I advised 254 figuring the lab could "take it from there" without an appreciable loss. I forgot where I was. Thanks for keepin me on my toes.

-Pete
 
I didn't mean to keep anybody on the toes.... in fact I misunderstood your answer quote, since the emphasis was on wallgreens, you could've known they've had a printer there working at 254 dpi

What's Durst Epsilon? I know the company makes enlargers... and that's it. :)
 
My reasoning is pretty much any printer is probably above 254, so it is probably compatible. And knowing what 254 looks like, I say just go with that. I think you'd have to struggle to see any difference.
 
jadin said:
My reasoning is pretty much any printer is probably above 254, so it is probably compatible. And knowing what 254 looks like, I say just go with that. I think you'd have to struggle to see any difference.
But then you might as well leave the resizing to the lab and not bother at all.

Bottom line - if you're going to resize, you need to know the printer and the size. Your sharpening technique depends on both of those variables.
 
DocFrankenstein said:
But then you might as well leave the resizing to the lab and not bother at all.

Bottom line - if you're going to resize, you need to know the printer and the size. Your sharpening technique depends on both of those variables.

That's exactly what I said. The 254 dpi is from not doing anything and just letting the lab handle it.
 
When I used a lab that had a Fuji, they told me to send them 300 DPI files. When I send a file to my Epson 2200, I use 300 DPI even though I print at 2880 DPI. I have been told that 300 is a somewhat universal file format for the vast majority of photo quality printers.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top