I have to agree with Roger's comments above. I hope Frances feels better soon.(A) No, my house isn't on fire
(B) There's enough stress in real life without inventing this sort of stuff.
...but never mind my photograph, I want to see jolefler's!!!
Dear Art,I'd take my camera. With that I can always make more pics.
Regards, Art.
Dear Art,
Absolutely. Frances and I were discussing this over dinner.
She reminded me that when she was 10 years old, and she was on her own, her house DID catch fire.
As she said, "I thought first about lives. Dog, three cats, and a parakeet. Then I tried to put the fire out. [She succeeded]. At no point did I think about any material goods. Nor did my father, who was a very keen photographer, ever mention my failure to save photographs. Today, if I had the choice and if I could reach the Alpa, I'd grab that. Photographs I've already printed? Negatives? Even my father's pictures? Who cares?"
To quote Bob Dylan (imperfectly, from memory), "You know she's an artist/she don't look back..." (Someone gave me the exact quote last time I said this, and I'm grateful, but it doesn't affect the sentiment).
Cheers,
R.
Maybe it's a good idea to save your photos electronically somewhere else other than your own house, but if the output is only 72dpi, well...
Like many people, you confuse output with display. Your monitor may display 72 or 96 dpi, but all displays map one "dot" per pixel. DPI is not a relevent metric for output, it's a relevant metric for input only. If you scan at 9600 dpi and your display is 96 dpi, an inch of your scan will take 100 inches to display. If you want to make an image that you can see all of on a monitor, you will have to downsample it. But your archives scan can be of a very high resolution, far higher than is practical for display on a monitor.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?