I haven't seen Digital Photo Pro yet, though I know the editor and
publisher well. If the repro is good, yes, you can. I've printed images
which clearly show the merits of camera, using as large a repro as
possible, at 200dpi screen, over the last few years.

Last month I sold my magazine f2 to a new publisher, and they failed to
create the correct type of PDF for my test reports on cameras - result,
meaningless large repros. You couldn't tell anything. The images were
downsampled too far. But when it's done correctly, you can tell a great
deal from DPS repros in magazines.

What you can not tell anything from is little two-column repros of
shots, backed up by huge images of the product - the usual failing of
the UK photo press. If Digital Photo Pro is using DPS images from
cameras, they are the first after me. Literally. In the last seven
years, I've been the only magazine editor to reproduce all digital
camera tests including a maximum size at 300 dpi repro. In 1992 I did a
front cover from 1.3 megapixels. Others have often reproduced 100 per
cent at 300 dpi small sections, or enlarged (100 per cent at 150 dpi)
samples, but very few have consistently done full pages and DPS.

If Digital Photo Pro is doing so, then they are on the right track. They
will be the first UK consumer title to be willing to spare this type of
space to show off results. For me it's been easy - short run, sheet fed,
specialist market subscription only mags. For them, rather harder to
justify. Two pages in a newstrade mag is extravagance.

David

If you get that magazine wherever you are, check out the photo and see
what you think.
http://www.digitalphotopro.com/home.php