Ken:

I can see a definite difference in the two images, it is about the differebnnce in the palette that is available, in other respects you are correct. Universal's lve action Peter Pan has one of broadest color palettes in DVD and it looks  a whole lot better at even 300DPI than it does at 72.

Skip

Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Ken:

I can see a definite difference in the two images, it is about the differebnnce in the palette that is available, in other respects you are correct. Universal's lve action Peter Pan has one of broadest color palettes in DVD and it looks  a whole lot better at even 300DPI than it does at 72.

Skip

Not sure if you're kidding or not here.  In case you're not - the images are exactly pixel-perfect the same.  Bring them into your favorite image editor and check.  DPI does not change the palette.  If you're seeing a difference, it's likely glare or the viewing angle difference of your monitor due to the image positions on screen.

Note as Grendell said, optical DPI absolutely matters and will greatly change how an image is scanned.

No, Ken I am not kidding. There IS a definite differnce in color gradient and that is caused by the improved palette, ken. There may be some differences in sharpness as well, but that would take some extensive digging and simply judge what i see as you presented it.

Skip

That's a possibility, Ken. And you are correct simply changing the DPI setting should not produce a difference. But there is a slight difference in the color gradient moving thorugh the greens, less apparent on yellow to orange.gradient.

Skip

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
No, Ken I am not kidding. There IS a definite differnce in color gradient and that is caused by the improved palette

Color depth and image resolution bear no relationship to one another.

---------------

I understand what you are saying, BUT i would argue it, since typically there gong to lower bit read at 72 than say, 300. I haven't done any SUPER LARGE like ummm 3600 DPI at 64-Bit, but I would think that anything above where I operate we woul;d start getting into the law of diminshing returns. it's less about resolution and more about color depth.

Skip

I sometimes do this as a part of my job and an image that is scanned at a higher dpi and a higher bit count will have a broader color palette. As Ken said, just taking an image and telling it in Photoshop or whatever program to be a larger dpi will not change the color palette or the actual resolution of the image, unless you use some kind of plug-in(s) or filter(s) to interpolate the colors. The only thing that may happen is pixel shift but new colors will not appear in the palette. The general rule is, a 72dpi image just doesn't have enough information to make it look any better, no matter what you try. You need an image scanned at 300dpi or better to have enough information to manipulate it. Ken and Dr. K are exactly right.

Oh man, what have I caused with using the wrong term?! 

DPI

A higher DPI in a scan results in a higher resolution.
1400x1000 instead of 700x500 for example.
For the use in DVDP I prefer a higher resolution scan, that gets automatically resized for the online database. (And on the new download I get the smaller pic for local also) I think the scans look more natural in this way.
But the quality depends of much more than just the resolution. Sometimes a very high resolution looks ugly, sometimes better.
And a resized pic (matching to the needed resolution), can also look different, depending on the program/type that is used. (I think what Invelos uses gives a good result, but there is also some Freeware on the net with which you can resize on your own)

And at last a cover scan is always a kind of personnel preferance.
For example in some cases I had this: An my high resolution scan the writting is getting finer. (I thought it was better matching to the original cover) But it got declined, with user-votes that say the readability is worse than on the existing.