Fair enough, William; I'll recast the question: Let's say you viewed a high-quality printout on high-qulaity paper of an uncompressed, high-resolution digital scan of a dozen..."
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: "Unfortunately, since there is no way to view an image on a computer monitor without taking an extremely hich quality loss, the arguement is moot. Making the presumption that images should be made for the widest possible distribution at the lowest possible quality is pretty derogatory to those who view quality as job one. There is still a huge number of photographers who are interested in the highest quality standard possible."
