On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 13:33, Nick Pelling wrote:
> dpi is one-dimensional, but scan size is two-dimensional, so the difference
> between 300dpi and 400 dpi is 3x3:4x4, ie 9:16 (ie, nearly 2x the size) -
> so a 600dpi scan would be 3x3:6x6 = 9:36 = 4x bigger.
> Also: if you start getting down to the grain of the image, you start having
> to encode the surface's texture noise, which can worsen the compression
> performance etc.
Yes, I was familiar with that but somehow misunderstood the initial
message and thought GC was meaning that the size difference was even
bigger than the expected one. Sorry for the confusion due to my hasty
reading...
J Esteves
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part