On 24 Jan 2005 at 6:36, William Robb wrote: Sorry if anyone has seen this post already but I didn't see it back, I'm sure I'm missing about 50% of the posts at the moment, so if I haven't replied to a post I'm not ignoring you :-)
> I'm not totally conversant with how a film image gets made into > seperations for publication, but the centerfolds in the old days were > produced from unenlarged Ektachromes, as opposed to enlarging the > images, which is what you would do if the image had been shot on a > smaller format film. They would have looked like 70's off-set print, not great and gamut limited. Before the advent of computer generated films for plate production plates were made on a repro camera using mechanical screens and filters and most often from original reflective artwork at 100%. So they would likely have been made from prints. Around the early 80's some of the larger print houses went digital in my neck of the woods so until then it wouldn't have been likely that any prints were made from direct scans of transparencies. Not until the mid 90's did stochastic screening became a reality and off-set prints really started to look fine grained. Until that point even though most printing plates were produced from laser printed films they still used regular screens and were resolution limited through the absolute resolution of the imagesetters and the limitations of the film to plate process. On top of that few off-set presses had the inherent accuracy to ensure sufficient registration to make a high resolution system such as Diamond Screen work. Some reading: http://www.heidelberg.com/wwwbinaries/bin/files/dotcom/en/products/prinect/scree ning_technology_eng.pdf Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
