Digital BW, The Print

thanks Paul, that is the kind of info I'm looking for.
and yes, I'm a windows user (at least at home)


> Actually, QTR allows for better control.  I now use the QTR point 
> list, which allows up to 51 points on a curve.  Moreover, decimal 
> points are allowed in the boxes.  I believe the full 16 bit range 
is 
> available (as opposed to IJC's 256 steps and only 10 points).  This 
> degree of precision is way beyond what even the most compulsive 
would 
> need.


 so if I understand correctly:

 YES, I will have the same amount of control over each ink (or jet) 
limit and curve shape, the same as I do in IJC, but just with more 
points to actually manipulate. it's just and issue of the interface 
being a numerical interface vs. a graphical interface?
 based on your comments, I take it you prefer QTR at this point over 
IJC/OPM?

 is all of the above correct?


 It does take some experience to learn how to do the work using the 
> points list.  It has a curve preview that is very useful, but 
beware 
> that the smoothing algorithm is not previewed.  As such, you have 
to 
> look carefully at the final curves set that is displayed when you 
> make the profile.  That will show whether the smoothing algorithm 
has 
> done something unexpected.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean there. could you elaborate??


> At any rate, both of these programs are excellent, having different 
> strenghts.  But don't worry about the ultimate degree of control in 
> QTR.  At least with the Windows interface I use, there is almost 
> unlimited control.

 just curious, what do you consider IJC/OPM's strengths (aside from 
the graphical interface)?

 thanks as always
 evan