Hi Nick, > ...but there is a certain "cleanness" to a > digital image that can make up for that. Does the sharpness of a cartoon "make up for" it's lack of detail? As is typical of digital image discussions, you are attributing artificial (and it is artificial) sharpness created by image processing and lack of actual image detail, with image fidelity. Note, I didn't say the images didn't look "good", as does a cartoon, but the image fidelity is greatly reduced. > It's the result that matters. But what may be "acceptable" results to you, someone else may consider poor. And of course, vice versa. Regards, Austin