| When I first started on the internet I was a | | | | them as 5x7 inch size. My new site |
| photographer and a science fiction fan. Since I did | | | | (betterphototips.com) looked very impressive and |
| nothave any science fiction photos of my own, I | | | | actually loaded very quickly. Yes, I also eventually |
| started surfing the web. After several months of | | | | stepped up to real high speed (1.5mbs per sec.) Life |
| looking through a large variety of Sci-Fi web sites, I | | | | was good; until I went back and started pursuingone of |
| realized that most of the sites that had any quantity | | | | my other great loves (writing). I figured rather than just |
| ofphotos put them up with very small thumb nail size | | | | using this site as a gigantic portfolio;why didn't I offer |
| prints (usually 1 inch x 1 ¼ inch or smaller). Keepin | | | | something for sale as well. You know the old adage |
| mind that this was in the days that a 28.8 modem was | | | | "write about what you knowbest"? To me it made |
| considered high speed. (Ha, ha) | | | | perfect sense that I should write about photography. |
| The reason these thumb nails were so small was that | | | | That's when things startedto get complicated. |
| it took so much time for the pictures to comeup on the | | | | When I started looking around at self publishing and |
| page. When you clicked on an individual thumb nail; a | | | | print on demand publishing, I found that theyall wanted |
| larger version of the picture cameup (usually 4x6 or | | | | the pictures to be 300dpi or greater. This was a total |
| bigger), but it would take a long time to do so. I was | | | | shock to me. I had thousands ofimages that I was all |
| just learning the web and Idid have access to | | | | ready to use, but they were all saved at 72dpi. I |
| Photoshop. | | | | thought that Photoshop couldsave me again, so I |
| What I did was search through all the big shots; saved | | | | started converting them to 300dpi but something didn't |
| the ones I liked, and then brought them into Photoshop | | | | look right. It made nosense to me at the time, but my |
| where I could compress them. I then made my own | | | | 300dpi images looked worse than my 72dpi images. I |
| site with images that looked as sharpor better than the | | | | was at a loss. |
| original; but my pictures were 2 inch x 2 ½ | | | | Then I went back and did my research. |
| inches, much better than all the reallysmall thumb nail | | | | The reason the images on the CD's that come from |
| shots I saw every where else. Through all my | | | | the lab are so huge (in measurement) is so youcould |
| searching I found that over 90% of the images I was | | | | use the images in either format. 72dpi is exactly 25% |
| finding were saved at 72dpi; so that's what I did. For | | | | of 300dpi. If you want your 300dpi imagesto look as |
| several years, I saved all myphotos at 2 inch x 2 | | | | razor sharp as your 72dpi images do on line, the print |
| ½ inches and at 72dpi. | | | | has to be 75% smaller. In otherwords, an image that |
| As my interest in photography continued to grow; I | | | | measures 44 inch x 56 inch at 72dpi would be the |
| realized that a Sci-Fi web site might be cool butit made | | | | same quality as an imagethat measures 11 inch x 14 |
| me no money. I needed to put up a web site of my | | | | inch at 300dpi. |
| own photos. By now I was using a 56kmodem and | | | | If you take an image that was originally 5x7 inches at |
| decided my pictures needed to be bigger. When I | | | | 72dpi and just try to convert it directly to 300dpiat the |
| scanned in my pictures I usually didthem at 100% at | | | | same size, it will not turn out very well. Similar to the |
| 72dpi; so that all my images on line where now 4x6 in | | | | equivalent of the right f-stop and the right shutter |
| size. | | | | speed, you have to take both factors into account! DPI |
| After a few years my lab started offering pictures on | | | | and Size are forever tied together. Youcan not |
| CD. They were also 72dpi so I didn't have toscan | | | | change one without affecting the other. It is much |
| them in anymore. Life was good. They put images at | | | | easier to make something smaller that looks good, |
| these huge file sizes like 44 inches x 56inches which I | | | | than to try to enlarge something after the fact and try |
| really couldn't figure out. I didn't know of anyone who | | | | to make it look even close to the original. The moral of |
| would ever print something thatbig; so again I took | | | | the story is; ALWAYS save your images larger then |
| those images and compressed them down to 4x6 | | | | you expect to use. Do not waste 15 years of your life |
| inch size. | | | | and thousands upon thousands of images that can |
| Eventually, I started doing the same thing but saving | | | | only be used in one way. Always save large!! |