images

On Oct 19, 3:49 pm, "choum" wrote:

BONJOUR
Jesuis debutant
Qui peux me dire l orsque l on va dans taille de l image Reechantillonnage etant decoche….
Pourquoi si on double la resolution, la largeur et la hauteur diminue de moitie.
Pourquoi ce nest pas le contraire?????
MERCI
DEBUTANT

Hi,
This is because the number of pixels stays the same but, as an example, instead of having 150 pixels per inch and you decide to change resolution to 300 pixels per inch, you are taking the same number of original pixels and cramming them into 1/2 the space. As a result, the overall size of the image becomes half what it was.

Say that you have an image 1" tall and 4" wide at 150 ppi. Divide the 4" into 4 sections of 1" each. Now you take the pixels from the 2 sections on the right and add them to the 2 sections on the left. The 2 left sections now have 300 ppi and there is nothing left in the 2 right sections. The 2 right sections no longer exist. Your image is now 1" tall x 2" wide.

Hope you understand this. I don’t write French well enough to explain in your language.

Keith

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:53:00 -0700 (PDT), keith wrote:

On Oct 19, 3:49 pm, "choum" wrote:

BONJOUR
Jesuis debutant
Qui peux me dire l orsque l on va dans taille de l image Reechantillonnage etant decoche….
Pourquoi si on double la resolution, la largeur et la hauteur diminue de moitie.
Pourquoi ce nest pas le contraire?????
MERCI
DEBUTANT

Hi,
This is because the number of pixels stays the same but, as an example, instead of having 150 pixels per inch and you decide to change resolution to 300 pixels per inch, you are taking the same number of original pixels and cramming them into 1/2 the space. As a result, the overall size of the image becomes half what it was.
Say that you have an image 1" tall and 4" wide at 150 ppi. Divide the 4" into 4 sections of 1" each. Now you take the pixels from the 2 sections on the right and add them to the 2 sections on the left. The 2 left sections now have 300 ppi and there is nothing left in the 2 right sections. The 2 right sections no longer exist. Your image is now 1" tall x 2" wide.

Hope you understand this. I don’t write French well enough to explain in your language.

Keith

Vous ette gentil, Keith.
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

On Oct 20, 1:27 am, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:53:00 -0700 (PDT), keith wrote:

On Oct 19, 3:49 pm, "choum" wrote:

BONJOUR
Jesuis debutant
Qui peux me dire l orsque l on va dans taille de l image Reechantillonnage etant decoche….
Pourquoi si on double la resolution, la largeur et la hauteur diminue de moitie.
Pourquoi ce nest pas le contraire?????
MERCI
DEBUTANT

Hi,
This is because the number of pixels stays the same but, as an example, instead of having 150 pixels per inch and you decide to change resolution to 300 pixels per inch, you are taking the same number of original pixels and cramming them into 1/2 the space. As a result, the overall size of the image becomes half what it was.

Say that you have an image 1" tall and 4" wide at 150 ppi. Divide the 4" into 4 sections of 1" each. Now you take the pixels from the 2 sections on the right and add them to the 2 sections on the left. The 2 left sections now have 300 ppi and there is nothing left in the 2 right sections. The 2 right sections no longer exist. Your image is now 1" tall x 2" wide.

Hope you understand this. I don’t write French well enough to explain in your language.

Keith

Vous ette gentil, Keith.
—
Mike Russell -http://www.curvemeister.com- Hide quoted text –
– Show quoted text –

Hi Mike,
Thank you . . .Hope you’re not looking for a date though. heh,heh,heh. And I think that might be ‘Vous etre gentil’.
Keith

keith wrote:

On Oct 20, 1:27 am, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:53:00 -0700 (PDT), keith wrote:

On Oct 19, 3:49 pm, "choum" wrote:

BONJOUR
Jesuis debutant
Qui peux me dire l orsque l on va dans taille de l image Reechantillonnage etant decoche….
Pourquoi si on double la resolution, la largeur et la hauteur diminue de moitie.
Pourquoi ce nest pas le contraire?????
MERCI
DEBUTANT

Hi,
This is because the number of pixels stays the same but, as an example, instead of having 150 pixels per inch and you decide to change resolution to 300 pixels per inch, you are taking the same number of original pixels and cramming them into 1/2 the space. As a result, the overall size of the image becomes half what it was.

Say that you have an image 1" tall and 4" wide at 150 ppi. Divide the 4" into 4 sections of 1" each. Now you take the pixels from the 2 sections on the right and add them to the 2 sections on the left. The 2 left sections now have 300 ppi and there is nothing left in the 2 right sections. The 2 right sections no longer exist. Your image is now 1" tall x 2" wide.

Hope you understand this. I don’t write French well enough to explain in your language.

Keith

Vous ette gentil, Keith.
—
Mike Russell -http://www.curvemeister.com- Hide quoted text –
– Show quoted text –

Hi Mike,
Thank you . . .Hope you’re not looking for a date though. heh,heh,heh. And I think that might be ‘Vous etre gentil’.
Keith

It’s "Vous etes gentil."

Ron wrote:

keith wrote:

On Oct 20, 1:27 am, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:53:00 -0700 (PDT), keith wrote:

On Oct 19, 3:49 pm, "choum" wrote:

BONJOUR
Jesuis debutant
Qui peux me dire l orsque l on va dans taille de l image Reechantillonnage etant decoche….
Pourquoi si on double la resolution, la largeur et la hauteur diminue de moitie.
Pourquoi ce nest pas le contraire?????
MERCI
DEBUTANT

Hi,
This is because the number of pixels stays the same but, as an example, instead of having 150 pixels per inch and you decide to change resolution to 300 pixels per inch, you are taking the same number of original pixels and cramming them into 1/2 the space. As a result, the overall size of the image becomes half what it was. Say that you have an image 1" tall and 4" wide at 150 ppi. Divide the 4" into 4 sections of 1" each. Now you take the pixels from the 2 sections on the right and add them to the 2 sections on the left. The 2 left sections now have 300 ppi and there is nothing left in the 2 right sections. The 2 right sections no longer exist. Your image is now 1" tall x 2" wide.
Hope you understand this. I don’t write French well enough to explain in your language.
Keith

Vous ette gentil, Keith.
—
Mike Russell -http://www.curvemeister.com- Hide quoted text –
– Show quoted text –

Hi Mike,
Thank you . . .Hope you’re not looking for a date though. heh,heh,heh. And I think that might be ‘Vous etre gentil’.
Keith

It’s "Vous etes gentil."

Merci. Enfin.

—
Bob LaBlawgh
“It’s never too late to have a happy childhood.”

(Ron) found these unused words:

keith wrote:

On Oct 20, 1:27 am, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:53:00 -0700 (PDT), keith wrote:

On Oct 19, 3:49 pm, "choum" wrote:

BONJOUR
Jesuis debutant
Qui peux me dire l orsque l on va dans taille de l image Reechantillonnage etant decoche….
Pourquoi si on double la resolution, la largeur et la hauteur diminue de moitie.
Pourquoi ce nest pas le contraire?????
MERCI
DEBUTANT

Hi,
This is because the number of pixels stays the same but, as an example, instead of having 150 pixels per inch and you decide to change resolution to 300 pixels per inch, you are taking the same number of original pixels and cramming them into 1/2 the space. As a result, the overall size of the image becomes half what it was.

Say that you have an image 1" tall and 4" wide at 150 ppi. Divide the 4" into 4 sections of 1" each. Now you take the pixels from the 2 sections on the right and add them to the 2 sections on the left. The 2 left sections now have 300 ppi and there is nothing left in the 2 right sections. The 2 right sections no longer exist. Your image is now 1" tall x 2" wide.

Hope you understand this. I don’t write French well enough to explain in your language.

Keith

Vous ette gentil, Keith.
—
Mike Russell -http://www.curvemeister.com- Hide quoted text –
– Show quoted text –

Hi Mike,
Thank you . . .Hope you’re not looking for a date though. heh,heh,heh. And I think that might be ‘Vous etre gentil’.
Keith

It’s "Vous etes gentil."

C’est fait rien …

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:41:48 -0700, Ron wrote:

It’s "Vous etes gentil."

See what you learn on this newsgroup 🙂
—
Mike Russell – http://www.curvemeister.com

keith wrote:

On Oct 20, 1:27 am, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:53:00 -0700 (PDT), keith wrote:

On Oct 19, 3:49 pm, "choum" wrote:

BONJOUR
Jesuis debutant
Qui peux me dire l orsque l on va dans taille de l image Reechantillonnage etant decoche….
Pourquoi si on double la resolution, la largeur et la hauteur diminue de moitie.
Pourquoi ce nest pas le contraire?????
MERCI
DEBUTANT

Hi,
This is because the number of pixels stays the same but, as an example, instead of having 150 pixels per inch and you decide to change resolution to 300 pixels per inch, you are taking the same number of original pixels and cramming them into 1/2 the space. As a result, the overall size of the image becomes half what it was. Say that you have an image 1" tall and 4" wide at 150 ppi. Divide the 4" into 4 sections of 1" each. Now you take the pixels from the 2 sections on the right and add them to the 2 sections on the left. The 2 left sections now have 300 ppi and there is nothing left in the 2 right sections. The 2 right sections no longer exist. Your image is now 1" tall x 2" wide.
Hope you understand this. I don’t write French well enough to explain in your language.
Keith

Vous ette gentil, Keith.
—
Mike Russell -http://www.curvemeister.com- Hide quoted text –
– Show quoted text –

Hi Mike,
Thank you . . .Hope you’re not looking for a date though. heh,heh,heh. And I think that might be ‘Vous etre gentil’.

"Vous etes gentil" ( or gentile if addressing a female).

Alan Browne found these unused words:

keith wrote:

On Oct 20, 1:27 am, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:53:00 -0700 (PDT), keith wrote:

On Oct 19, 3:49 pm, "choum" wrote:

BONJOUR
Jesuis debutant
Qui peux me dire l orsque l on va dans taille de l image Reechantillonnage etant decoche….
Pourquoi si on double la resolution, la largeur et la hauteur diminue de moitie.
Pourquoi ce nest pas le contraire?????
MERCI
DEBUTANT

Hi,
This is because the number of pixels stays the same but, as an example, instead of having 150 pixels per inch and you decide to change resolution to 300 pixels per inch, you are taking the same number of original pixels and cramming them into 1/2 the space. As a result, the overall size of the image becomes half what it was. Say that you have an image 1" tall and 4" wide at 150 ppi. Divide the 4" into 4 sections of 1" each. Now you take the pixels from the 2 sections on the right and add them to the 2 sections on the left. The 2 left sections now have 300 ppi and there is nothing left in the 2 right sections. The 2 right sections no longer exist. Your image is now 1" tall x 2" wide.
Hope you understand this. I don’t write French well enough to explain in your language.
Keith

Vous ette gentil, Keith.
—
Mike Russell -http://www.curvemeister.com- Hide quoted text –
– Show quoted text –

Hi Mike,
Thank you . . .Hope you’re not looking for a date though. heh,heh,heh. And I think that might be ‘Vous etre gentil’.

"Vous etes gentil" ( or gentile if addressing a female).

Ahh, but if addressing a female, wouldn’t you say "Tu es gentile" ? A bit more ‘personal’? <G>

Sir F. A. Rien wrote:

Alan Browne found these unused words:

keith wrote:

On Oct 20, 1:27 am, Mike Russell
wrote:

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:53:00 -0700 (PDT), keith wrote:

On Oct 19, 3:49 pm, "choum" wrote:

BONJOUR
Jesuis debutant
Qui peux me dire l orsque l on va dans taille de l image Reechantillonnage etant decoche….
Pourquoi si on double la resolution, la largeur et la hauteur diminue de moitie.
Pourquoi ce nest pas le contraire?????
MERCI
DEBUTANT

Hi,
This is because the number of pixels stays the same but, as an example, instead of having 150 pixels per inch and you decide to change resolution to 300 pixels per inch, you are taking the same number of original pixels and cramming them into 1/2 the space. As a result, the overall size of the image becomes half what it was. Say that you have an image 1" tall and 4" wide at 150 ppi. Divide the 4" into 4 sections of 1" each. Now you take the pixels from the 2 sections on the right and add them to the 2 sections on the left. The 2 left sections now have 300 ppi and there is nothing left in the 2 right sections. The 2 right sections no longer exist. Your image is now 1" tall x 2" wide.
Hope you understand this. I don’t write French well enough to explain in your language.
Keith

Vous ette gentil, Keith.
—
Mike Russell -http://www.curvemeister.com- Hide quoted text –
– Show quoted text –

Hi Mike,
Thank you . . .Hope you’re not looking for a date though. heh,heh,heh. And I think that might be ‘Vous etre gentil’.

"Vous etes gentil" ( or gentile if addressing a female).

Ahh, but if addressing a female, wouldn’t you say "Tu es gentile" ? A bit more ‘personal’? <G>

C’est tres vrai!