----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Brobst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 12:37 PM Subject: Re: EOS Photo size weirdness (was 8 x 12 photo paper)
> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Parrott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 1:26 PM > Subject: Re: EOS Photo size weirdness (was 8 x 12 photo paper) > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Henning Wulff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 11:55 AM > > Subject: Re: EOS Photo size weirdness (was 8 x 12 photo paper) > > > > > > > At 10:35 AM -0600 3/24/04, Steve Parrott wrote: > > > >I'm hoping someone can clue me in on what happens to photo ratio sizes > as > > > >you increase photo size. This has always puzzled me. WHY does the > width > > / > > > >height ratio change instead of remaining the same regardless of size? > > > > > > > >Here are examples of what I mean. These are the exact size numbers that > > come > > > >up when sizing the height in PhotoShop. Note the increasing dimension > > ratio > > > >changes as the sizes increase. > > > > > > > >I cannot understand why this happens: > > > > > > > >3 x 2.057 = .943 difference > > > >4 x 2.742 = 1.258 difference > > > >5 x 3.428 = 1.572 difference > > > >6 x 4.113 = 1.887 difference > > > >7 x 4.799 = 2.201 difference > > > >8 x 5.484 = 2.516 difference > > > >9 x 6.17 = 2.830 difference > > > >10 x 6.855 = 3.145 difference > > > >11 x 7.541 = 3.459 difference > > > >12 x 8.226 = 3.774 difference > > > >14 x 9.597 = 4.403 difference > > > >20 x 13.711 = 6.289 difference > > > > > > > >etc. etc. > > > > > > > >Can someone explain this to me? > > > > > > ?????? > > > > > > The ratios are the same. What do you mean? > > > > > > > The ratios are the same ?????????? I guess I don't see how that can be > > when a 3 inch high photo has a width of 2 inches, and a 20 inch photo has > a > > width of 14 inches. That's a BIG difference between height / width ratio, > > (at least as I see it). Obviously there is something here *I* am not > > understanding, and / or I am not getting across what I am meaning. In > other > > words, if a photo is sized at a height of 6 inches, and the width comes > out > > to 4 inches (rounding numbers)... that is a difference of 2 inches. So > why > > does not a photo sized at 20 inches height have a width of 18 inches, (two > > inch difference), instead of the width of 14 inches, (a SIX inch > > difference)????? > > > > Steve > > > I think you are confusing "Ratio" and the "differential" of dimensions, > ratio does stay the same. > As an example if you increased a 4 x 6 by a factor of 3 it becomes a 12 x 18 > the ratio is the same both increased by a factor of 3 but the differential > of the dimensions is now 6 not 2. > That explains it... I need to go back to high school math I suppose! Thanks, Steve * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
