|
From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2007-02-12 06:22:14
|
Daniel J Sebald wrote: > No, I didn't mean DPI, more a relative sort of thing. I believe what > I meant, after thinking a bit, is dots-per-"show ticscale" on the > test image. So, yeah I guess that is scale. Clarification: meaning there is no need for this "resolution #" thing I first proposed; dots-per-"show ticscale" already accomplishes that. But yes, scale that Ethan referred to controls thickness of lines, size of symbols, etc. (relative to that "show ticscale" length in the test pattern, I'd argue). Dan |