It clearly doesn't look fine as presented to at least two people. Are you saying you didn't notice any of the things I mentioned in the pic as posted?
Shel "You meet the nicest people with a Pentax" > [Original Message] > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I've been wondering the same thing. It's a ten inch tall (approximately) 72 dpi image. Viewed as presented, it looks fine. If it's blown up to say 200%, it becomes effectively a 36 dpi image. Artifacts will appear at that level of pixelization that may not be present in the hi-res image. I firmly believe that it's impossible to determine image quality from anything that small. In my opinion, all one can really derive from web images is an overall judgement of composition, color and framing. > Paul > > > > Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > > Bill, there are lots of artifacts around the lower tip of the nose, around > > > the nostrils, Likewise where the ear meats the face, around the eyes > > > (eyelashes). There's a blurred area where the boy's shirt collar blends > > > into the skin of his neck (in the front of the shirt), and lots of > > > artifacts along and around the collar of the shirt up near both his > > > shoulders. The area around his lips shows the same problem, as well as a > > > slight blurring where the red of the lips runs into the paler skin. There > > > are many more such areas throughout the photo ... I was about to send you > > > an off list mail about this, but since Markus brought it up I'll just join > > > him and confirm his observations. I'm surprised no one else has seen these > > > problems or that they've chosen not to mention them.
