Digital BW, The Print

A similar issue came up on Photo-I board a while back.  Vincent had 
been supplied with a sample print from the 7600 that looked franky 
horrible under a loup.  This was from the Epson driver,  of course.

I posted a sample from ImagePrint from the 7600, using the same 
image, and also at 2880, that looks just as good, if not better, than 
the 2100 output.

It is possible that ImagePrint is the best choice with the 7/9600, 
and the Epson driver is the best choice with the the 2100, if dot 
size is al that concerns you.

Quentin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Dan Honemann" 
<dan_honemann@y...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "bart7172001" <bc@b...> 
> wrote:
> > So where is the butter smooth, superior to Epson 
> > dithering IP5 is advertising?
> > Andrew (Rodney) – was this not your comment at one point?
> 
> Very interesting results, Bartek.  Thanks very much for posting 
them.
> 
> I'm wondering if the difference in your findings vs. Andrew's might 
> be attributable to differences between the 2200 and 7600 (I believe 
> Andrew's IP5 samples were produced by the latter)?  Although I once 
> presumed these machines were using identical print heads, that 
turns 
> out not to be the case, and it could be (though I hate to 
contemplate 
> this, being a 2200 owner myself) that the smaller printer can't 
> compete with the larger's potential when using this RIP.
> 
> Dan