> Von: "Andrew Chadwick" <[email protected]> [Resending to the lists]
> Hi, sorry for the late reply. Boudewijn just reminded me of this on IRC. > > Option 2 gets my vote too. I'd prefer "dpi" or "ppi" to make the unit > explicit, but *res is fine too. > > Default value of 75dpi is fine, though apps can of course impose their own. The 'dot per inch' is ambiguous, in GIMP we changed all references to this to 'pixel per inch', IIRC there no 'dpi' in the UI anywhere. ORA should not add to the confusion here, IMO. Maybe ORA should also suggest metric units instead? :) > Do we really need separate X and Y resolutions? If some people *do* > need separate axis resolutions, what are apps which assume square > pixels to do? The same as GIMP, maybe - in its default mode (called 'dot for dot', because 'pixel for pixel' was a bit more misleading there), it discards the resolution and assumes all pixels to be square for display. Disable this and you'll see you image with non-square pixels. > Average? Max? FWIW, I prefer a single resolution value, > but this is not my workflow so perhaps I'm ignorant of the > requirements here. Some formats use non-square pixels, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_aspect_ratio#Pixel_aspect_ratios_of_common_video_formats -- Regards, Michael _______________________________________________ Mypaint-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/mypaint-discuss
