Digital BW, The Print

Hi Herb,

> > > that for all practical purposes we
> > > can consider them to be "continuous tone" printers
> >
> > The Piezo system is technically considered "continuous tone", even
> according
> > to Jon Cone, who has been in this very business for many many
> years.  The
> > accepted term "continuous tone" really means gives the "appearance"
> of
> > continuous tone...and I would also add, uses multiple inks, not
> just black.
>
> Hmm, well I guess if the experts use "continuous tone" to mean "gives
> the appearance of continuous tone" then I can't quibble.

Oh, please DO quibble!  I've had a number of arguments about this very
subject with Jon...and others.

> But what terms are we then to use to differentiate between half-tone
> printers (those that create a colored pixel by breaking the color
> down into a bunch of differently colored spots) and continous tone
> printers (like dye-sub printers, which are able to lay down pixels of
> specific colors "by building up varying densities of primary colors
> in the same spot". (from Blatner and Fraser, Real World Photoshop).

Understood.  But, technically, there is no such thing as "continuous" tone,
as you are always subject to SOME resolution, meaning just how little can
you add that you can measurably make a distinguishable difference.  Believe
it or not, it's a dynamic range thing.  Yes, somehow I seem to work dynamic
range into just about everything, including dinner ;-)

> I realize that inkjet spots may now be so small that their prints
> appear to be continous tone, but they still seem to fit the
> definition of "half-tone" printers that compose specific single-color
> pixels out of differently colored dots.

At least in the B&W world, I would say that halftone specifically relates to
using black and not black, and that you are clearly moving more towards
continuous tone by providing more "shades" to work with...  But I understand
the issue you are raising, and I agree, BTW.

Regards,

Austin