I can't say what resolution the camera is scanning at.
If the resolution is meant to indicate a standard monitor 1280x1024
you are looking at roughly 72 dpi. Not great but convenient.
(I am by no means an expert on digital cameras so that is just a guess)
When I was researching for a scanner purchase, I went to
http://www.scantips.com. I exchanged a couple of emails with the
site maintainer. Basically film has a much greater resolution
than appears in the image. Standard photos you can get away with
scanning at 180x180 dpi without really losing anything.
(definitely check out scantips, some really good information if they
are still up.)
Your best bet is to get a negative or film scanner. Then
you can raise the resolution to take full advantage of the film.
The drawback is they are expensive.
As for the format to save them in. You might want to try
PNG as well. See the following:
http://www.scantips.com/basics09.html
Hope this helps.
Greg Kettmann wrote:
>
> Sorry, this is off topic, but I know that only extremely intelligent
> people use Linux so someone will probably know the answers ;-)
>
> Could someone please clarify resolutions. I have a scanner and a
> digital camera (and of course a regular camera). Now 300DPI is pretty
> self explanatory. My digital camera is something like 1280x1024.
> That's fine but lacking a measurement it's meaningless. What is the
> equivalent DPI measurement? If that's for a 1" picture it's great but
> if it's for and 8x10 it's not so good. Is it standardized and if so
> what is the default picture size (which of course would yield the DPI as
> well).
>
> Now for the really tough question. What is the approximate resolution
> of a standard photograph?
>
> I want this to scan photographs. It seems that 300DPI is a good bet,
> any comments? My scanner/scanning program saves in TIF by default.
> I'll probably convert to JPG. My JPG converter has a 0-100% scale for
> "losiness" (new word I just made up, means the amount of loss ;-) )
> I've found that 100% (no loss) is a waste since the file size is about
> the same as the source file. Between 80% and 90% is good. I personally
> can't see the difference but there is significant file size reduction.
> Much below 70% and I can begin to see the loss.
>
> Thanks for any feedback. GGK
>
> **********************************************************
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
> *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
> unsubscribe gnhlug
> **********************************************************
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|| || ||
|| Todd Littlefield || SPECTRUM Apps Group ||
|| Aprisma Mgmt. Tech. || - Tactical Division ||
|| [EMAIL PROTECTED] || - C, C++, Perl ||
|| (603) 337-5621 || - HTML, CGI, Java ||
|| || ||
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
