> > Assuming 90 dots per inch resolution and a 1:1 mapping, your picture > > should be 1440x2160 = 31 megabytes. > > > > That rules out almost all monitors and line speeds for optimum > > viewing. > > > For optimum viewing therefore you need to decide for yourself > > what is the target screen size and resolution, and make the largest > > picture you can that fits, allowing the audience to take in > the whole > > thing without scanning or scrolling. The audience will just have to > > lean a bit closer to appreciate the fine detail of the picture. > > Yup. What detail is visible anyway. An A3 print is so much nicer to
> examine closely. > I should have added to my post that given the current near-impossibility of providing the optimum size of photograph, you have to compromise. The trade-offs are between showing the fine detail as best you can, and showing the whole picture at the expense of fine detail. Most people prefer to show the whole picture at the expense of fine detail, and most audiences seem to prefer it. However, if somebody (JCO for example) in some circumstances wants to trade the full-picture view then it's his choice and everyone should get off his back about it. Regards Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
