> Hey, Austin.. Drop the loupe, hop up from your desk, stick an 11" > x 17" 300dpi print on the wall next to a 200 and a 100 - and then > take 2 steps backward..
I have a wall I use for print evaluation. It has a large magnetic white board, and strip magnets on it, used to hold the prints. I put up prints side by side and evaluate them. My largest print size is 17x22 from my 3000. I can see differences from "standard viewing distances" that have convinced me that 180+ is the minimum resolution that is acceptable to me for the type of work I do, if not 240+ preferred. 100 is vastly degraded. > It is generally agreed that your average photo lab print is at > best 200 dpi, Where has this been agreed upon? I'm not doubting it, but I never heard that. I also would say that probably doesn't hold true for (especially B&W) darkroom prints with decent negatives and decent enlarging lense. > Umm, maybe it is just that your printer doesn't work well at 100 > dpi, Austin..? :-)) In order for me to print at 100dpi (without decimating the data), I would have to make a VERY VERY large print. For a 2 1/4, I scan at 2540...and that gives me a 24x24 print at 240. I'd be over 50" x 50" if I was to print at 100dpi. Point is, whether 100ppi looks "good" at all VASTLY depends on print size. Certainly 100ppi will look GREAT if the print is the size of a billboard, but for a 13x19, it looks poor, IMO.
