Would it be possible to require the merchants to indicate the dpi resolution of the background packages offered for sale in the MP?

When I see a package I like, I almost always have to write the merchant to find out the dpi resolution of the images.

This is important information, as 72dpi images cannot be used for print work. 

Thank you!

Hi Sin,

Good point!  I'll talk to Clint about it and see what we can do.

Thanks, Deb :)

You're the best!

Hmm, the thing is the only info you need is pixels x pixels (i.e. 1024x768, 1600x1200, etc.)
Actually, the dpi is the resolution you're going to print at, the output resolution. You can calculate the final print dimensions using the formula:

Pixels ÷ DPI = Inches

So, for example, a 1600 x 1200 pixels image will be 21.33x16 inches at 72 dpi.
The same 1600x1200 image will be 5.33x4 inches at 300 dpi.
So the only info you need is the image dimensions (pixels x pixels). You determine de dpi by changing the dpi of your image in your graphics software without resampling.

Asking to indicate a digital image resolution in dpi is only going to cause confusion.
Hope this helps.

Barb

Nope..that's not the only information I need. 

I print in various sizes.  72dpi will result in an extremely poor print and I wouldn't consider purchasing packages at those sizes.

I need the dpi to know the quality of the resolution and so I can calculate my needed print size.  I would never purchase a package that is 72dpi.

So, that's the information I need to know, for my personal purposes.

It shouldn't cause any confusion.  It's a simple as telling me the dimensions.  They can tell me the dpi.  There's a HUGE difference in quality between a 1200 x 1600 72dpi image in print (egads, just print it and see) and a 1200 x 1600 image at 300 dpi.

This is information a consumer has a right to know.

To further clarify, I am not asking about photographs taken with a digital camera.

I'm asking about background packages that are created in Poser, Photoshop, Painter, etc.

The merchant is well aware of the dpi of these images, as they select the dpi when they save them.

Without that information, anyone with print intentions is lost.

I think I didn't explain it correctly. I'm sorry, English isn't my mother language.
Digital images don't have a native dpi they come at. You change the dpi in your graphics software, prior to printing. An 1600 x 1200 image is a 1600 x 1200 image, no matter what. When you are going to print it, you decide the output resolution (dpi). As I said in the example, a 1600 x 1200 pixels image will be 21.33x16 inches when you set it at 72 dpi.
The same 1600x1200 image will be 5.33x4 inches if you set it at 300 dpi.

It doesn't matter what kind of image it is, if it was taken with a digital camera or created in a software package. They are still pixels.
And it doesn't matter what dpi they choose to save them at, the pixel dimensions is what matters, since you can change the dpi the same way, as I explained above.

What you don't understand is the difference in quality between a 72dpi image and a 300 dpi image. 

Of course, you can change the dpi from 72 to 300, but when you do, there's a lot of noise picked up in the image, which makes for a VERY poor print quality. 

So, while you are correct, what you are saying is not applicable to my concerns.  I work for publishing houses and sell prints of my work all the time and I can assure you, when you change a 72dpi to a 300dpi, the quality of the print is not of any value and I certainly wouldn't try to sell it.

Thanks for your input, but I do need the information and it shouldn't confuse anybody to include it.  In fact, some of the background packages do offer this information (see Bez and Antje's packages). 

For anyone doing HIGH QUALITY print work, it's important information.

Attached Link: http://www.thegoldenmean.com/technique/resolution.html

This link does it well, I think.
In my opinion, it is important to be well informed before asking for information that doesn't have any practical meaning. I can save my 1600 x 1200 background at 300 ppi and it will be the same as a 1600 x 1200 image saved at 72 dpi. The only difference is that in the first case you will be able to print it at good quality at 5.33 x 4 inches, while in the second case you will be able to print it at poor quality at 21.33 x 16 inches. The thing is, in either case you will be able to change this setting  for the output of your choice without altering the image at all. It will still be the same 1600 x 1200 image, and that's what counts.

As I said, the link attached explains it much better than I can.
Barb

I'm sorry, but no where does that article discuss changing a 72dpi image to a 300dpi image, in fact, it's discussing the reverse. 

Why don't you take an image and save it in the same size at 72dpi and at 300dpi.  Now, take the 72dpi image and increase the dpi to 300, but keep it the same size.  Now print that.  Now print the original image that you had saved at 300dpi.  And then you can come here and tell me how it makes no difference.

I and my publisher are extremely well informed when it comes to print work, as that is what we do for a living.

Since you are so utterly opposed to providing a consumer with information they feel and know is important, I'll continue as I have, writing the merchants and asking them the dpi of their work, purchasing packages that contain imagery that is 200dpi or greater.

Thank you for your assistance in resolving my problem.

NOT

Let me try to explain this to you one more time, because you are not understanding the issue:

If I purchase a 1600 x 1200 image at 72dpi and I need it to be 1600 x 1200 for print purposes and I take that 72dpi image into my editor and change it to 300 dpi and ALSO keep it at 1600 x 1200 I am going to have a noise filled, unprintable image.

Don't believe me?  Just do it.

First of all, I'm not utterly opposed to anything. I was just trying to explain why the information you ask for isn't needed. I don't have a problem stating the ppi of an image I sell. My point is that it simply isn't of any use.
Second, you're talking about resampling the image, and I couldn't agree more: if you resample the image and make it bigger it will print horribly. I was talking about NOT resampling the image, which means you're using the image as it comes, as it was created, which is what you're interested in.
The link explains it well, specially the animated .gif under "The Fluidness of Dimension"

Third, I don't think a battle of credentials will accomplish anything. We understand our points or we don't. If I'm not being clear enough, showing you my credentials won't make it magically clear.

I'm not being interpreted correctly and that's probably my fault. So, I'm sorry. Let's just pretend my posts were never written.
Barb.

Barb:

If I purchase a background package, to use in something I am going to create and print, and I am specifically purchasing the package because the stated size would be appropriate for the end product, can you understand that without the dpi information, I have no idea if that package would suit my needs?

If I purchase a package of 1600 x 1200 backgrounds, and need to print them at 1600 x 1200, can you understand that if that background package had images that were 72dpi that I just wasted my money?  Because as you said, I would have to resample the images and if I have a specific print size needed, I have just spent money for something that is absolutely worthless to me.

So, since these packages are being sold for "commercial use" and a logical commercial use is print, can you see why it should be required for the dpi disclosure to be made?  Otherwise, how would anyone who intends to use the background as something incorporated in an image that needs to be printed at a specific pixel size, know if they are purchasing something they can use?

There's a beautiful set of large fractal images that are new to the marketplace and in a reasonable pixel size.  However, after writing the merchant, I have discovered they are 72dpi, which means if they were reset to 300dpi, they would be itty bitty tiny images that would be worthless, unless I was going to print a postage stamp.  That is why the dpi information should be provided when a package is offered for commercial use.

I am sorry for the misunderstanding and for my frustration during our discussion.  I am hoping that Clint will see that without this information, for those of us who are purchasing exclusively for print use, we can't possibly make a purchase.