Trying to get decent quality photo prints
of mOrg related activity. Should not be difficult..
after all..the .jpg's parked online can look very good.
howsumever...I have attempted to get halfway decent
photos printed using half a dozen "home use" grade
printers..[Canon/HP]..including some that bill themselves
as "photo printers". They all suckketh for quality..
even for 4x6's.
Ok..hand off several orders of pics stashed on flashdrives
to Walmart. Walmart is using "commercial grade" line printers [HP has the Walmart contract]
Results..dismal. they succketh. even at 4x6.
...ran an experiments making "wallet size"..they look a little better..but going to "tiny pictures" in not the
..the imager for the Celestron 44306 boasts a 2 megapixel
imager. ok..fine..that should be sufficient to gin up
4x6 photos at 300 dpi. [4x6=24] one square inch
=300x300=90,000. 90,000 dots per square inch
x 24 sq. inches=2.16 Mp. should be a perfect match.
whats farking up?
MSPAINT indicates that the pics are being saved at 96 dpi...regardless of what format the pic is being saved
as. [VGA and larger]
^^640 x 480...96 dpi
^^ 3200x2400...96 dpi
96 dpi is junk. 300 dpi is decent photo territory.
need to change the 96 dpi nonsense.
Arcsoft "webcam companion" software that ships with the
camera has no "switch" to change the dpi. It appears to
be a hardwired default..which..totally suckketh.
This is quite ...annoying.
ginning up decent hard copy photos to give to "physicians"
as souvenirs..could take a while..
a bit baffled as to why the "online pics" can look
very good..and the same pic looks like frogsquat
...something to do with .jpg works with web..
but .jpg sucks with photopaper prints?
* ..maybe the .bmp setting in Arcoft...
maybe... .bmp works with photo printing?
....ok.. .bmp setting in Arcsoft only made
matters worser...went from 96 dpi to 87 dpi..
..back to the drawing board, Beeker...
and bring some more chalk.