Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Tyler Boley" <tyler@t...> 
wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "TerryR" 
<terryr1028@h...> wrote:
> big snip
> > Just my theories and I may be a mile off. Make sense?
> > 
> > Terry
> 
> Yes it does make sense. So I think the term applies to the actual 
dot creation, and you understand it to apply to how the 
> dots are put down. There is definitely a difference and I don't 
know for sure which is correct, not sure it matters much any 
> more.
> As far as your thinking on the driver itself, it all sounds 
reasonable. I think I know the evolution of the driver, but it 
doesn't 
> help me understand it really, since I'm way out of my element at 
that point.
> This is one black box that is really sown up.
> Tyler

I think you are right, we are using the term for two different 
things. I believe though that we are both correct. 

I think dithering as you mean it does apply to the initial dot 
creation at the software level of the imaging program and is the 
correct term. In Photoshop they use the term dither to apply to 
conversions for 8 bit images at the color space level. While this 
actually doesn't create the dot it does map the information for the 
creation of the dot.

I think dithering at the driver level takes that created dot 
information and then determines how the dot is actually applied to 
the paper to match both the dot information and the placement of the 
dot. Maybe this isn't the proper term on my end, but it sounds like 
Jon has interpreted it that way also.

Maybe Steadman has the definitive answer?

Terry