They're definitely what *I* expect; I've got them hanging on the wall in front of me as I type.
The purely-optical photographic print is the sharpest. A 300ppi print (from a top-of-the line digital printer) isn't quite as good. Similarly, 200ppi prints aren't quite as sharp as 300ppi prints (made on a printer which is actually capable of genuinely working at both resolutions). In what way did your experiments differ from this? (You might want to be sure of *your* ground before being quite so snarky, too) > You would be well advised to personally run this science fair experiment before > instructing others to do so, because the results will not be what you expect if the > prints are viewed with the naked eye. > > BR > > "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > � � This suggests that a good optical full-frame print made from 35mm media > > � � might be able to deliver something approximating to a 600ppi 8x12 print. > > � � Put this alongside a 300ppi print and you'll see the improved sharpness, > > � � just as you will if you put a 300ppi print alongside a 200ppi print. > > > > __________________________________________________________________ > McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network. > Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today! > http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397 > > Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge. Download Now! > http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455 >
