Text 11306, 68 rader
Skriven 2005-09-16 09:40:00 av JAY EMRIE (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av JEFF GUERDAT
Ärende: Re: Power Point
=======================



JG>GH> GH>My computer club has an "InFocus" LP755 and it "automatically"
JG>GH>interprolates
JG>GH> GH>images to its native 1024x768 ... occasionally you see some
artifacts.

JG>GH> JE> Is that with text or photos?

JG>GH> Yes.

JG>JE>Maybe I should have said: Is that text or competition quality photos?
JG>JE>After all this is for a Camera Club.

JG>I haven't seen you acknowledge that virtually ANY projector the club can
JG>afford is going to interpolate the display.  A 4MP camera/scan is something
JG>like 2304x1728 (that's actually the image size of my wife's 4MP Kodak
DX6490).
JG>My film scanner scans at 5400dpi, leading to 8100x5400 images (if full frame
JG>35mm).  Will the club ever afford a projector that can natively project at
JG>even the lower resolution?  Will it be attached to a computer that can
display
JG>that resolution?  If the answer is "no" then it's a rather moot point - all
JG>you can do is attempt to minimize the interpolation artifacts.  The use of
JG>PicturesToExe has no bearing - Irfanview would be able to do the same thing
JG>although the algorithms used to determine what data to throw out to reduce
the
JG>image to screen resolution may be different and, hence one *may* look better
JG>than another if scrutinized closely enough (you'd never see it if doing a
JG>slide show, especially if the projector can't resolve the image at a higher
JG>rate, either).

Jeff, we fully realize most of the above. However, digital projectors,
like most any other device are not ALL the same. Some will project a
better image than others regardless - they all have lenses do they not?
Not all lenses are equal. As far as affording - just what dollar value
are you intimating?
PicturesToExe cannot - will not - MAKE a better image nor will any other
program including Irfanview when manipulation is not to be done after
the image has been submitted. PicturesToExe provides better and easier
image sorting and rearrangement than any other like program we have
looked at. That is the reason for selecting it - so far.

JG>It you're judging digital images, it should likely be on the basis of a
print
JG>from a good dye-sub printer, not a projected image.  If the projected image
is
JG>what you have to go with, you must accept the limitations of the device
JG>displaying the image in the first place...

No, the digital imaging is to be a separate category as opposed to
prints, slides, etc. The limitation of the device? That is what we are
trying to determine for each possibly considered projector. What is the
limitations of particular digital projectors, therefore which ones are
best? They can't all be the same, can they?

Have you ever gone to a workshop presentation by a "master"
photographer when he uses a digital projector for showing his work and
giving instructions aimed at teaching one to do better photography? They
try to select the best digital projector available for that purpose.
That is what we are aiming for.

Jay

---
 þ OLXWin 1.00a þ Footprints in the sands of time are not made by sitting down.
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)