On 3 Dec 2005 at 18:28, Bob Shell wrote: > Why 360 rather than 300? A techie at Epson told me that anything > over 200 was just wasted. I standardized ages ago on 300. I can't > see any difference between prints made from files at 200, 300 or 360 > on my 2200.
When I was printing on inkjets I had a test sheet I'd run to test the performance of the printer, driver and paper. It was a simple QXD embedded with copies of an image that contained good detail at stepped resolutions. Inspection of the printed the test page revealed the optimum print resolution. I think blanket statements regarding optimum print resolution are pretty useless as the printer in concert with the driver its settings and the paper type determine the optimum print resolution. Also I never experienced problems printing images with resolutions that weren't multiples of the natural printer resolution on any inkjet print systems. 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
