Depends on whether you are re-sampling the image for screen or print... big difference...
If you do not resample, the only thing you will be changing is how large the image will be displayed (by DPI-aware software) or printed.
Allow me to use Quark Xpress (publishing software, just in case you wonder!) as an example...
If I take a screenshot, I have a
72dpi (screen resolution) 1024x768 pixel image. If I import this image into Quark, it will fill the screen, and be considerably larger than an A4 page... at 361x270mm (1024/72 = 14.2 inches!). But it will print at lower-than-acceptable quality, because it's blown up so much.
Changing the resolution to 300dpi in photoshop - but NOT resampling - will bring it in to Quark at the size you can safely print it (at print resolution, typically 300dpi) without losing quality - 86x65mm (1024/300 = 3.4 inches)
Re-sampling from 72dpi to 300dpi will add more information to the image (otherwise termed "interpolation") to bring it up to the 361x270mm size at print resolution... but whether you interpolate ("blow up") a 72dpi image in Quark or Photoshop, you're essentially asking the software to add information to the image to make it look bigger. And different methods of re-sampling (available in photoshop) will achieve different results.
So, re-sampling = adding information to the picture, whereas changing the DPI (resolution) = telling the output device how large to show/print the image.
Any clearer?
Anyway, it is always best to work at the higher resolution that you will require (e.g. 300dpi, for printing) and then down-sample the image to 72dpi if you need it to be smaller (e.g. for on-screen viewing) - rather than the other way around.
Cheers,
Dave
