> I think you've said it, except I would just add a comma "don't do it, you > fool." > > Why not just lower the resolution by a few dots? You don't say how you're > outputting but there's no "optimal" resolution so I would adjust that before > interpolating. If you must interpolate, Bicubic or one of the actions from > Fred Miranda...
OK, Thanks for all the handy tips. The re-size ended up being about 4-5mb per pic, which is still not enormous, but I have been told often "don't do it, you fool" , that I thought I'd ask. I did consider dumping the resolution to 340dpi or something, but again a fellow listee advised that it is always best to print at a dpi in direct ratio with the printers max dpi setting ie. my 1160 is 1440, so printing at 720, 360, 180 dpi etc generates optimal performance from the machine. Anyway, the results are fantastic and it is mostly down to a cracking profile for my printer from Thomas H and Neil B from this very list. A big hand...all those of you floundering about with un-profiled printers...you have been warned! Oh and respect too to William C for Vuescan tips. The scans I am getting out of my Nikon are great... Love yah! Andy -- Andy Johnstone Photography Member of the Association of Photographers (UK) E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T: 0033 4 68 69 32 28 M: 0033 6 08 63 75 35 F: 0044 870 133 9149 W: http://www.focusphotos.com =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
