Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [78-C] Digest Number 804

Expand Messages
  • jackson32@mindspring.com
    ... Whatever i ve read on scanning generally states that anything beyond 72 D.P.I. is superflous for monitor viewing, WON T make any visible difference and of
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      > Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 22:44:58 -0500
      > From: Roger Wade <rwade1947@...>
      >Subject: New Auctions of Old 78's
      >
      >Greetings List Mates and Friends,
      >
      >Happy New Year.
      >
      >Recently I have used a larger size label scan in my auctions because of
      >the better clarity and detail it provides. However I received e-mail
      >from someone whose opinion I value which indicated that for many people
      >this size scan takes too long to load when viewing the item on ebay. I
      >would appreciate input from anyone who would like to provide it as to
      >whether the better clarity is worth the delay or whether the more
      >normal, smaller size scan is preferred. Thank you in advance to all who
      >send feedback on this issue.

      >
      >Roger Wade
      >Natick, MA
      >
      >ebay ID: rwade1947
      >

      Whatever i've read on scanning generally states that anything beyond 72
      D.P.I. is superflous for monitor viewing, WON'T make any visible difference
      and of course makes the file sizetoo large and too slow to come up.. My own
      experience verifies this. I have scanned some photos to my own web space at
      72 DPI in dimensions that would be more than adequate for your needs and
      they come up quite rapidly at 72 DPI.
      Many web site designers would do well to heed this advice from the pros.
      Nothing is more aggravating than an interminable wait to view an image that
      is needlesly to large in (file) size.
      Jack
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.