Hey remember me?

Good gravy,,, I did not mean to stick my finger in a hornets nest here :o) I fully respect all your viewpoints but please allow me to re-phrase the question,

Regardless of anyones thoughts on ppi or dpi or dot gain or political beliefs the question is quite simple:
Has anyone seen an option to change the default 72 ppi output of ImageReady to a different setting?

yes, no, maybe, would have been just fine with me thanks.

As for all of the confusion and arguments about graphic imaging terminology it just would not be fair if I did not toss another can of gasoline on your fire for fun.

If you read through the Adobe help files in Photoshop 7.0 you will eventually come to the part where they say,

"In Photoshop, you can change the resolution of an image; in ImageReady, the resolution of an image is always 72 ppi. This is because the ImageReady application is tailored to creating images for online media, not print media."

This paragraph below, also directly from the Photoshop 7.0 help file is a prime example of exactly why this very common argument and
misunderstanding of terminology is kept alive to this very day. I ask you is this from the experts at Adobe or from clueless copy writers ?:

"The number of pixels or dots displayed per unit of length on the monitor, usually measured in dots per inch (dpi).
Monitor resolution depends on the size of the monitor plus its pixel setting. Most new monitors have a resolution of about 96 dpi, while older Mac OS monitors have a resolution of 72 dpi."

Lets dissect that first sentence.

"The number of pixels or dots displayed per unit of length on the monitor, usually measured in dots per inch (dpi)."

They are talking about a monitor, period no question right.

A monitor displays an image by way of pixels (witch is an abbreviation for "picture element") period, a scientific fact.

First they say monitors display with pixels then one second later they say monitors display using dots.

Then they say (per unit of length) and (dots per inch).

The fact is monitor manufactures always use (pixels per inch) as the unit of length to describe monitor resolution.

This is not to be confused with monitor "dot pitch" which is another part of monitor manufactures specifications.

Dots per inch do not and can not be used to refer to a monitors display.

Why?
Because a monitors display is made up of pixels which are activated by an electron beam from three color guns in the back of the picture tube.

Not because there is a printer inside of the picture tube spraying dots of ink on the inside of the glass!

Next they say,
"Monitor resolution depends on the size of the monitor plus its pixel setting."

What they call monitor resolution and pixel setting refer to the same thing (the pixels per inch that a monitor can display).
I have a 22 inch monitor that is built at 96 ppi and a 17 inch monitor also built at 96 ppi. So diaganal monitor size is irrelevant.

Monitor resolution is measured in ppi and is determined by how the manufacturer built the monitor.

And finally as they state in the next sentence,
"Most new monitors have a resolution of about 96 dpi, while older Mac OS monitors have a resolution of 72 dpi."

One more time Adobe boy, please its pixels not dots.

And yes most all new monitors are built to display at 96 ppi (pixels per inch) including the one on my desk.

Also,
Printing presses display images by building up ink "dots" through different line screens for each color.

Ink jet printers display images by spraying out small "dots" of colored ink (very small).

A: The only thing that can display an image using pixels is a monitor or other electronic display tube.

B: The only thing that can display an image using dots is a printer or other mechanical device.

As long as people in the industry and book copy writers keep using three or four totally different terms as if they where one, this confusion will continue.

Another reason people get mixed up is they are using pixels on the monitor and in their graphics programs then when they push the button and send it to the printer it gets converted to dots (dpi) by way of unseen complicated internal software.

Most people dont think about this conversion in their head as they see the printed output.

None the less it is a conversion and it is two different displays with two different terminologies.

Yes you can change the apparent viewing size of a monitors screen (640x480) (800x600) (1024x768) on and on.

However this does not change the factory built-in resolution of the monitor (96 ppi)

They are only narrowing the focus of the picture tube to show an apparent wider view.

========================================================= Hey I almost forgot, there was a point to all of this,,,,

As Adobe correctly stated most all new monitors are built to display at 96 ppi not 72 ppi

That is why I ask to change the default output setting of ImageReady to 96 ppi.

Because 72 ppi is not using my or your monitors full resolution potential.

The extra ppi allows for more image bit depth information not more inches.

one inch is still one inch regardles if there is 96 pixels in that inch or 72 pixels in that inch

And before we get back into that old bar room brawl, yes the image file size measured in bytes (not dots) will increase somewhat)

This is a trade off I would like to have the option of choosing for myself.

Maybe I have a web site where I want to display works of art for sale and I want to use the full potential of everyones monitor to display my inventory.

When people come to my site they want to see a good detailed image before they buy it. They understand it may take longer to load but they want it.

Maybe I have small navigational images on that web site where I could save for web at 72 ppi because thats all it requires to display nicely.
==========================================================

For another can of gas you all could talk about bit depth increasing the file size.

I read last week where the Japanese have prototyped a new kind of flat panel display that can display 10 bit instead of eight bit color depth and they said it will be 15 times the resolution of todays HDTV they even had to build a special video camera just to record 10 minutes of video to display on it for a demo.

As a final note:
Forums in my view are about the friendly exchange of knowledge not arguments and anger.My opinion is just that, (mine) if you check it out and find it correct thats great if not, you can pick out the good parts and toss the rest no harm done.

This is fun, thanks for all your help everyone.

David_Boone

Replied in the following topics

How to save for web at 96ppi ?