Subj : Re: Why do their heads look too narrow, or wide To : All From : Nononomisc07@bigfoot.com Date : Mon Jan 02 2017 01:30:00 From: micky Subject: Re: Why do their heads look too narrow, or wide In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Sun, 1 Jan 2017 23:57:13 -0600, VanguardLH wrote: >micky wrote: > >> Is there an active newsgroup that's good for graphics, art, or computer >> graphics? >> >> On the theory there isn't, I'll tell you my question. >> >> I belong to an organization that has membership cards, and last year >> they added photos to the membership cards. >> >> If I wanted my picture added, they insisted that I send in a high >> resolution photo, even though the picture is only about 1" square. Does >> this make sense? They said their card-making place said to insist. >> >> I didn't have a hi-def picture, just one from scanning a passport >> pictuer on my home scanner. >> >> At any rate, when the card came, the picture looked great, the color >> looked great, there was plenty of detail (to the extent one can see that >> in 1" square) but my head was squeezed together horizontally. Some >> people might have a head as narrow, but I don't. >> >> I don't see how this could be related to high definition but otoh, we >> have two anomalies and I don't want to assume it's a coincidence. Might >> they be related? >> >> Finally, they sent me a brochure with some of their more hot-shot >> members, and maybe 20% of them look like their heads are squeezed too. >> Of course I don't know them and maybe they really look like that. One >> guy looks like his head has been widened!! >> >> I found a picture of two women in this brochure and an earlier letter. >> She actually looked normal in both of them, and were it not for the ones >> that look abnormal, I'd not know which is the accurate picture, I think. >> >> What's going on? >> >> Should I tell them? I think the full color glossy brochure cost a lot >> of money. If I knew they were going to reprint it, I'd tell them before >> they did it, but I don't know and I won't know. WRT membership cards, >> it's not like it really matters if our heads are distorted. Mostly I'd >> like to understand how it happened. > >Did you send a picture whose dimension (vertical and horizontal) were >equal? Yes. > If not, and because their pic was 1" square (meaning vertical >and horizontal are equal), they would have to stretch your pic in one >direction to make it square. Well I see that you're right, basically. Their picture was *about* 1" square but was actually narrower than it was tall. So you're all right. They squeezed it rather than cropped it. Very strange since they didn't need to show my shoulders, and plenty of the pictures don't. Some have the heads reaching almost to the edge, but my head is only in the center 60%. The brochure pictures have an even higher ratio of height to width, but they must have been cropped since the distortion is no greater than for me. I don't know if this is done by the organization, or if the brochure and membership cards are done by the same company, but somewhere they have more than one person doing the pictures and one of them doesn't know what he's doing. If an outside company did this and not the org president's younger brother, they're not getting what they paid for. One woman actually looks cuter with her face stretched than in the other picture, but she's the only one and many of the men and women look noticeably weird. (And many other pictures they did correctly.) >If you still have the pic you sent in, right-click on the image file and >look at its Properties. Look under the Detail tab for the height and >width attributes. Are they equal? Well, I've looked at both the pdf file and the .jpg file and they're both square. Well 2360w x 2219h, 94% of W = H But it does say 2400 dpi which was their minimum standard, but he still said it wasn't hi def, maybe because it was only 1.8 meg, which it said was not enough. Hey that's another thing, they had conflicting standards of what was hi-def. At the time I thought they knew more than I do but now I think not. Not that I know what hi-def is but if it meets one standard I think it must meet the other measure. Thanks all. --- ViaMAIL!/WC v2.00 * Origin: ViaMAIL! - Lightning Fast Mailer for Wildcat! (1:261/20) .