On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 22:08 +0100, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Perhaps the distance between the pixels is different. This "feature" > is for example possible woth > TIFF images.
Uwe, I am interested in this statement. I work everyday with georeferenced rasters (where distance has a meaning, i.e. you set some unit for your pixel). But, concerning non-georeferenced rasters, the "distance between pixels" does not make sense to me. Pixels are... well, picture elements. And when you have an image 600x600 pixels that's all about it and it depends on the displaying device how big is each pixel or the printing device on how much you'll get out of it. Of course the term pixel is being used in many and varying contexts. Could you please extent a bit or give some pointers? Thank you, Nikos
