> Well the old Epson list (it may still be going for all I know) did > *lots* of testing and came up with the 240ppi figure.
For those struggling to get a grip on resolution issues its important to work with guidelines that are likely to result in some initial success without too much deep do-do theory! I have always taught students to use 240ppi as a basic image resolution. Many have told me that 360 (or 480 or...) give better results but nobody has yet put a print in front of me that convinced me of a real benefit. Indeed, when pixels are in short supply, a good quality image file may well print ok at 180ppi and let you get the size you want without interpolation. For beginners, my mantra is 'You look after the pixels, select the photo quality resolution for the printer and let the dots look after themselves' For Epson printers this invariably means selecting 1440dpi. 2880 is too damn slow but 720dpi 'may' be ok on matt papers which are less likely to exhibit banding. > Having said that I have tried chucking a full 144MB file as well as > optimised files at a 2100 and generally they both come out really > well. Not sure I can tell the difference I agree entirely. In many ways I feel there is an analogy here with HiFi performance....but I wont go there for fear of getting my knuckles rapped for moving OT ! As far as resizing in the Print With Preview dialoge is concerned I steer clear........what is the point of doing all the nice careful stuff in Photoshop and then doing some arbitrary resize at that late stage ????? Get the size right in Photoshop! Oh yes, it causes great amusement but I call the 'Resample Image' tickbox a 'VLB' ( Vicious Little Bastard)! It certainly gets the message across that it is to be used with care and understanding and is best left unchecked unless you are going there with a passage plan.......... Tony Riley (surrey) www.imageplace.co.uk =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
