Originally posted by Blue I guess you missed the part where I said I used them with lcd projectors. I said nothing about computer monitors. The high res was/is required for scientific journals and has to do with output.
My apologies if I got the wrong end of the stick -
a PowerPoint presentation using an LCD projector is still limited to the display card's maximum output resolution - which normally does not exceed the "best" monitors - in fact many of them are VGA = 640x480 or if one is lucky SVGA = 800x600 this is lower than the monitors I quoted at 1650x1050 or 19200x1080 -
the point is most digicam images including your 5Mp Nikon far exceed the LCD projector requirements.
Or have I got it wrong again? -
if so, please kindly quote the LCD projector model # and its specs?
Originally posted by Blue Edit:
Where did I say a 2 mp RAW was better than 6 mp jpeg? I didn't. However, you fail to realize that there are additional data in a RAW file.
I did not say you did, I was going by the LCD PowerPoint presentation -
and the PowerPoint "slides" were very unlikely to have exceeded the common (even hi-res) monitor since PowerPoint is for PC screens.....
Any additional data in RAW is simply not visible when displayed on a typical (even hi-res) PC screen or LCD projected - since they have to be translated/converted to TIFF or JPG and displayable on a PC - which means typically sRGB and 8-bit......
Please feel free to correct me again with the typical PowerPoint "slide" resolution you had to work with (if necessary post one somewhere where we can all look at it please?)
Originally posted by Blue Edit: Edit: Nor did I say it had jack shit to do with bad imaging. I bet you were a hoot with a Polaroid.
really,
that was unnecessarily
RUDE -
I was not being rude or even disrespectful to you.
If you wish to be rude please take it off-line in a private message please.