Originally Posted by voxmagna
I've read in many places that the 300 PPI is a practical limitation of the photographic process. I would guess though that if the difference were dramatic they would have found a way to improve the process
But if the original premise of this thread is correct, and we can only resolve 300dpi with the unaided eye, there is no reason for photographic paper manufacturers to attempt to get better resolution than that. They expect the print to be the final product. It's just perverse people like us who keep wanting to scan prints (or even inspect them with a loupe), instead of going back to the negative or the digicam file.