Just go to radio shack, get a 24 or 120v fan, mount on outside, and run
seperate power, this will assure no overheating!
neil_snape wrote:
on 20/03/2005 12:13, HPDesignJet_Printers@yahoogroups.com wrote :
You need to drop 12 volts at 0.15 amp
E=IR ...R=E/I = 12/.015 = 800 ohms.
I agree with Rafe: why are you printing at 600 ppi? (BTW: it's PPI
not
DPI.)
I find that if I print a photo set to 200 ppi at 100%, it looks razor
sharp with the naked eye, even up close.
Website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPDesignJet_Printers
Post message:
There was the problem of upsizing to 600 PPI discussed here and the
implications are no real fun.
For Windows users there is a better solution:
http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi031/HP_Designjet_30.html#PPI
Uwe
Website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPDesignJet_Printers
At 09:17 PM 3/21/2005 +, Uwe wrote:
There was the problem of upsizing to 600 PPI discussed here and the
implications are no real fun.
For Windows users there is a better solution:
http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi031/HP_Designjet_30.html#PPI
No, this still accomplishes
I was considering not responding to this, as my last post touched on
most of this. But to the benefit of some, I will gamble and try again.
There is much over looked here and I know many photographers are
resolution freaks, including me.
The only question is, can the HP printers
somehow
At 06:13 PM 3/21/2005 -0800, Bill G wrote:
Once again, these are native pixel counts, not
resolvable image dpi clearly better than film - scanning though.
Losses are much less, 25 - 40% on average.
This is why digital capture produces much smaller files of
equal resolution vs. their
FYI: I printed a crop of this file:
http://homepage.mac.com/billatkinson/.cv/billatkinson/Public/Profile%20Test%20Images/Lab%20Test%20Page.sit-link.sit
This original file was 180 PPI only.
Thanks for all your clarifications (my files are mostly from 8-16.7MP
digital cameras)
Uwe
Rafe
I need no convincing that pixels from a good digital
capture carry more information than pixels from a
film scan;
The more should say, more accurate, a pixel, a dpi,
it's all one spot in a grid.
I've seen ample evidence of that myself,
but it has no bearing on my
