>   Jorge Parra
>    APA/ASMP wrote:

> Subject: [PRODIG] Re: In Deep Digital Trouble
> Interesting to mention here that a colleague  in NY , just wondering
why
> should Canon use 180ppi as the "reference" resolution of all the
images
> coming out of their cameras, he decided to run a  proof test at 180
ppi
> and
> results were astounding to him, leading to the apparent conclusion
that it
> may be possible the the 300 dpi rule applied to files from scanners
can be
> broken down t 180dpi on files from digital cameras, and 225 given
> absolutely comparable results than 300 dpi files. Should that be the
case,
> then you won't have to upsize that much anyway.
> 
This is not surprising because of the way files are rasterised for
printing. For a 150 lpi (lines per inch) screen a 150 ppi (pixels per
inch) image is needed BUT when sampled for rasterising it is inevitable
that some pixels will be sampled twice and some missed! Result is poor
reproduction. Make the original image 300 ppi and you guarantee that
good sampling will result in the best possible resolution of detail in
print. In fact I think it take a very fussy printer with a loupe to tell
the difference between the result from a 225 and a 300ppi original when
printed at 150lpi. My own belief is that the 'quality' of an original
makes more difference than simple dpi.

Assuming the printers will use a 150line screen have you considered
preparing the file at 150ppi and then enlarging to 300ppi using PS
'nearest neighbour' setting. My tests in PS suggest that this will avoid
the 'softening' of some details that bicubic can cause as it
interpolates.

Most inkjet printers use stochastic (diffused) screening rather than the
fixed screening of most image setters and if printing at 1440dpi are in
theory screening at 90lpi (one cell of dots 16x16 creates one pixel with
a value between 0 and 256). I suggested a while ago that anyone who
thought different should try printing a lens testing chart or similar on
their inkjet. I have now done that and surprised myself! My Epson 1290
can (just)resolve 1 pixel line pairs at 360ppi, though in truth the
white gaps between the lines of ink are only just discernable with a
magnifier. 180ppi is the limit of my eyes on photo paper. Assuming they
actually produce 256 levels in each colour they are achieving the
theoretically impossible. Does anybody know how?

Paul Lawrence

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.461 / Virus Database: 260 - Release Date: 10/03/2003
 

===============================================================
GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE

Reply via email to