Re: Measurement Conversion Utility

Thank you for explaining to me what my human brain is capable of.
However, that isn't what I asked for.  And I don't need a conversion
utility to convert points to inches and vice versa.  I would like to
convert a value of points and/or inches into an approximate value of
pixels, much like what Photoshop does.  I've been using photoshop already
for such things, but I've come to the point where I don't wish to load
photoshop merely for conversion purposes while working in Illustrator.  I'd
like something small that's quick to load.  I thought, perhaps, someone
would know of a simple conversion utility much like the ones used to
convert RGB to Hex/Hex to RGB.  

On a side note: Speaking of relevancy, while I do realize you are quite
intelligent, you seem to have this incessant need to respond to relevant
questions with irrelevant snide comments.  People ask questions here
because they want information.  The valuable information you give doesn't
need to be packaged with your ego.  

On 07:04 AM 5/21/99 -0500, Harold A. Driscoll slipped this into my mailbox:
>At 04:45 21-05-99 , Kristi Russell wrote:
>>Does anyone know of a conversion utility that converts points to pixels,
>>inches to pixels and vice versa?  If anyone can help me here, I'd really
>>appreciate it.
>
>The human brain, using a process known as antithetic (and for some
>algebra), should be quite capable of doing so. Alternately, you've a
>variety of calculators, ranging from desktop mechanical marvels to
>electronic gee-gosh-wows, from which to choose.
>
>On paper, a point is approximately 1/72 of an inch, and an electronic point
>is 1/72 of an inch. To the extent that it matters for printers
>(decreasingly so, I might note), the pixel per inch (or per point) varies
>considerably, and often differs in the horizontal and vertical dimension.
>
>On screen, a ~screen inch~ is extremely whatever you want it to be. Some
>prefer that a ~screen inch~ is actually that, while others follow the
>Microsoft Office model of using a screen ratio which relates reasonably
>well to the printed measurement.
>
>While use of pixels typically has some relevance to screen display, such is
>decreasingly the case, at least with regard to fixed-size pixels. Of
>course, even from the early days there have been screen displays (vector
>rather than raster) for which the concept is hardly relevant. That's one of
>the reasons I personally prefer use of the term 'pel' (picture element).
>
>Safe computing,  /Harold
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>Harold A. Driscoll                       mailto:harold(at)driscoll.chi.il.us
>#include <std/disclaimer>      http://homepage.interaccess.com/~driscoll/

__________________________________________________________
 Kristi Russell / darkfires(at)darkfires.com / Freelance web designer
 http://www.darkfires.com  /  http://www.darkfires.com/design
 ICQ pager: 12013114(at)pager.mirabilis.com

HWG: hwg-graphics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA