Posted by Onideus Mad Hatter on 12/06/05 01:45

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 14:13:11 +0000, Mimic <dev@null.com> wrote:

>Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
>> On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 11:59:53 +0100, Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote:
>>
>> Your stupidity is beyond amazing...check this out...
>>
>>
>>>1. An image can not (I repeat: *can* *not*) be 72 PPI.
>>
>>
>> http://www.backwater-productions.net/_images/mine3.png
>>
>> That image has EXACTLY 72 pixels per inch, count them out if you're
>> feeling especially stupid, MORON.
>>
>>
>>>2. PPI says nothing about DPI. Nothing. Nothing at all.
>>
>>
>> Um, yeah it does, Stupid. For example, if you tell me you have an
>> image that has a PPI of 72, I can tell you it's going to print like
>> shit! WOAH...I must be like Miss fuckin Cleo, huh?
>>
>> Here, let me Wikislap you!
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dots_per_inch
>>
>> "The number of pixels per inch in a computer display is sometimes
>> specified in this way as well. Usage of the DPI measurement in these
>> cases is considered by some to be inaccurate and misleading, though
>> the intended meaning is usually clear based on context."
>>
>> Oh ho...you got BITCH SLAPED! ROTFL...tsch, tsch, tsch...it's too bad
>> stupidity like yours isn't painful.
>>

>If youre going to try and have a go at them, at least fucking make the
>effort to READ something first.
>
>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3d/DPI_and_PPI.png

Um...that's an IMAGE, Retard...how do you figure one can READ a
PICTURE. o_O

Put it down, child, yer done.

--

Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ¹ x ¹
http://www.backwater-productions.net

[Back to original message]