It’s a neat thought experiment, but the pixels on my screen are only the window into the data. A 4K monitor gives you about 1 px per 0.5 mm on a full‑bleed screen, so if you’re looking at a map that’s only 1 m per pixel from the satellite, you’re already squinting at a blur. The satellite’s ground sampling distance—usually 30 cm or more—sets the true detail limit, not your monitor. In practice I just trust the source resolution, then let the software upscale or downscale to the nearest convenient DPI for the route. The pixel density matters for UI clarity, not the grit of the terrain data itself.

Yeah, I always set the scale to match the ground sampling distance before I even start drawing a path. It’s a small habit, but you can lose those micro‑features if the zoom is off. So keep an eye on that, and let the UI do its job—just don’t let it trick you into thinking the terrain is sharper than it actually is.

Sounds like you’re doing the right thing—double‑checking DPI and grid alignment keeps the math honest. Small fixes, big payoff, that’s the whole point of a good map. Just keep the margins tight and the rest will follow.