What is the resolution of "glossy magazine" photographs?

Recently, Lassi Hippeläinen posted:

dadiOH wrote:

wrote:
How many dpi would you say approximates the resolution of
photographs printed in "glossy magazines". Does it vary hugely?

When I used to run ads I'd specify a screen of 135 for mags. Less
than what the mag normally used (180?) but what they normally used
always looked muddy...lacked clarity.

The local glossy photo mag, which is pretty tech-oriented, once
printed images from 200, 300 and 400 dpi originals side by side.
There was no visible difference between 300 and 400.

Aside from their screening resolution (lpi) and method (stochastic,
traditional, etc.), whether one can see a difference between higher
resolutions depends on the image. The content of many images don't require
higher resolutions, but that isn't true for *all* images. In my area
(technical publishing), the content can often reveal visible differences
between 300 and 400 ppi images, even with traditional screening. It's one
of my frustrations that people get locked into "rules of thumb" on these
matters, and ignore the content.

Regards,

Neil

wrote:
How many dpi would you say approximates the resolution of photographs
printed in "glossy magazines". Does it vary hugely?

Most of the magazines I've worked with use a 133 line screen, or 266
ppi. Some covers are more, and some specialty ads on custom paper can
be more. But from what I've seen, images can look mighty good with a
133 line screen if they are on decent paper and the plates are done
right. Not as good as a real photo print, mind you.

One of my pet peeves is magazines that say "the image has to be 300
dpi" when they don't specify a dimensional size. I once (accidentally)
sent an image at 180 ppi that was definitely useable (it was something
like 14x18" at 180) but they bounced it back saying "it has to be 300
dpi". Duh - easy to resize in any photo editing software.

One reason I think stock photos need to be larger is for cropping. One
client might want only Shakira's face for their celebrity column, while
other (more sane) photo editors will include her whole body for the
layout.

Karl Winkler
http://www.karlwinkler.com