3D Guy, "100x100 pixels @ 72DPI is exactly the same as 100x100 pixels @ 300DPI" Correct of course, BUT a 10" x 10" printed image @ 72 dpi will only be 720 x 720 dots whereas a 10" x 10" printed image @300 dpi will be 3000 x 3000 dots, quite a difference. I am talking about the printing of images off a printing press, not for screen display. As most peoples monitors will be running at 96 dpi, there is absolutely no point having display images over that resolution as it will make no difference to what you see other than the image on screen will be bigger. If you just tell a pc to resize a 720 x 720 pixel image (see above) to be twice the resolution (144 dpi) then the software will have to take each pixel and add another one next to it by looking at the pixels neighbors and "Guessing" at what colour values to use for tese extra pixels. You will indeed get a 10" x 10" image now at 144 dpi, but half of those pixels will be made up.... not good. Far better to render the image at twice the size (1440 x 1440 pixels 20" x 20" @72 dpi) and then RESAMPLE the image to 10" x 10" @ 144dpi There is no guessing of colour values by the software and no jagged edges, it is using the same no. of pixels, just squeezing them into a smaller space giving a lot smoother image . The file sizes will stay exactly the same because you are using the same no. of pixels. Hence if you want an image at 288 dpi (quite OK for press work) abd you don't want to use quality, you need to render your image at 4 x the size. eg. if you want your 10" x 10" image at 288 dpi PRINTED you would need to render it at 72dpi X 40, 2880 X 2880. Thats 40" x 40" @72dpi BUT 10" x 10" @288dpi. I am fully aware that you can just change the dpi setting of an image, but that is a terrible way of prepping anything for press printing, you should always avoid getting the software to add and guess pixels if possible.
A fine example of this from a slightly different angle. you have a small original photo that is needed to be included in a book, BUT it is needed at twice the phots size (say the original photo is 2" x 2" and it is wanted 4" x 4") In preparing the artwork for press, you could just scan the photo @300 dpi and then resize it in photoshop to 4" x 4" @ 300dpi The image is twice the size and therefore twice the number of pixels (from 600px x 600px to 1200px x 1200px) BUT photoshop has had to GUESS the extra 600 x 600 px. NOT GOOD. Far better to scan the image at 600 dpi (far greater resolution than the press can print) ant to have the software resample the image to 4" x 4" @ 300dpi, thus keeping the same number of overall pixels, but doubling the size of the image. No guessing the extra pixels. You are then left with an image that is indistinguishable from the original but is twice the printed size.
Miles