> i disagree with WR. a monitor's contrast range exceeds that of any printed
medium and can easily achieve just as good color
> fidelity. 200dpi color monitors have been with us now for a couple of
years and they are able to reproduce everything that can be
> captured from a color slide. these monitors cost on par with what 17" and
19" monitors used to cost 10 years ago. that is why
> programs like Photoshop have gamut tools to tell you what parts of your
image can't be reproduced in print. you use.
Please explain this a bit further. Somewhere I'm in the dark here. If my
file is 3400 x 2200 approximately how can I truly see the quality when my
monitors top res is 1600 x 1200 and usually it's set on 1024 x 768. The
previously mentioned file size prints out at approximately 300dpi on a 11.5
x 8 full page if I remember correctly. From the tests I've done on my
monitor I can tell very little difference from a high res photo to a res
approximately at my monitor res.
