>From: Jack Phipps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >It is also a good way to show to the lab that >yes, you do loose something at the highest quality setting. It still seems to me that the main point is that this "digital" lab doesn't even understand the basics of digital imaging if they don't know that JPEG is a lossy format. The fact that a JPEG might be good enough seems secondary. It's hard for me to believe that if they don't understand the basics that they somehow understand, and get right, the more difficult stuff. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
- RE: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Cooke, Julie
- Re: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems EdHamrick
- Re: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems WRGill
- Re: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems WRGill
- filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Colin Maddock
- Re: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems IronWorks
- Re: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems IronWorks
- RE: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Jack Phipps
- RE: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Stan Schwartz
- RE: filmscanners: ADMIN :attachments (was Re: S... Tony Sleep
- RE: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Henry Richardson
- RE: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Tony Sleep
- RE: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Shough, Dean
- Re: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Arthur Entlich
- Re: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Henry Richardson
- Re: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Brian D. Buck
- Re: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems(pho... Viacheslav Zilberfayn
- RE: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Jack Phipps
- RE: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Stan Schwartz
- Re: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems EdHamrick
- RE: filmscanners: Re: Scanning problems Cooke, Julie