That may be true to an extent robbiwc, but only in terms of our own monitors, and they will all be different. When I make a new wallpaper for my system it looks visibly sharper when I make it exactly the correct pixel dimensions. I'm not sure the ppi matters in this context.

But for the web and for printing it has no relevance at all, as the viwer has their own display or the print has its own requirements.

Please trade sensibly. The rule is always Caveat Emptor. It is quite normal for buyer and seller to make their arrangements to suit. Providing both agree.

Please don't air the negotiations in public, or anyone else get invloved. If either party is unhappy, don't do the deal, but just leave it at that.

ppi (pixels per inch) is just the definition of how large an image suitable for printing or publication will be. Reduce the ppi and you increase the print dimensions, but then you need to view the print from further away for it to appear sharp.

For normal (up to A3) prints that are generally viewed relatively closely, 300ppi is the norm. The K-5 output actually provides just about an A3 print at 300ppi without doing anything to it. Perfect.

Of course, there can be many reasons why we want to crop the image, in which case we will have to set the ppi and the new image size and let the software interpolate accordingly. All values, ppi, dimensions and number of pixels, are interconnected.

What's the nature of the debate exactly? And does what I have written answer it? With the title by the way, for a horrible moment I thought someone was going to tell me they had several thousand pounds to refund me....but I guess, tongue-in-cheek, you knew that.

Have you set something like cross processing?

There have been so many improvements that the case for FF diminishes with time.

At one time Half Plate might have been considered the preference of serious amatuerus, by the end of the film era medium format was as good as most of us aspired to, and 35mm film was actually better for many applications.

I find APS-C a convenient format and although I'm happy to take on board every improvement, I don't really want the extra bulk and cost of 24x36mm format.

Some will, in which case there will be something on the market for them.

It has been posted a couple of times and it looks impressive. I don't intend to ever use my cameras in that way....

A little something then from the newish 35mm f/2.4

You can turn off power save mode and the battery can take it without too much difficulty.

Many thanks for sharing, it's a photographic journey that I'm sure will have a resonance with many people.

Does the lab in Paris not publish its requirements? All the labs I use have a list on their websites showing the required parameters for optimum results.