Digital BW, The Print

Harvey,

I am not an expert. I am a collector of information. IRIS Graphics
printers were the prestigious quality inkjet system years ago when I
started my notes card file. There were not yet EPSON printers useful
for photography. IRIS printers print pixels with dots which is of
their sole distinction.It prints the pixels with many many tiny dots
of ink. The dots are of varying sizes. If you need to know the dpi of
those many dots as a comparison to Epson you can easily find this
information at http://www.cone-editions.com/conetech/3047.htm  and at
http://www.irisgraphicsinc.com/index.html

I have had IRIS prints made and they are a just a little finer than
EPSON 9000 prints in perceptive visual quality. What I like best
about IRIS is that they do not need coated papers to have good
looking color. So the softer papers afford a quality which is
preferable to my eyes. They are velvety yet sharp. I am sorry that
they never made one for home use. We would have bought one.

-Della




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., SKID Photography
<skid@b...> wrote:
> Todd Flashner wrote:
> 
> >  on 2/13/02 6:00 PM, SKID Photography wrote:
> >
> > > David,
> > > Interestingly, the stated dpi for the IXIA is only 300.  I
tried going to
> > the
> > > 'specs list', and the page loaded as code.  IXIA is not very
impressive,
> > > despite
> > > their statement that the 'perceived' dpi is much greater. 
Sounds to me like
> >
> > > the
> > > 'Emperor's New Clothes'.  ;-)
> >
> > If I'm not mistaken the Durst Lambda has a stated dpi of 300 (or
400?) and
> > it's really continuous tone for all practical purposes, so I
think "stated"
> > dpi is one of those misleading specs (dare I say, marketing ploys
;-)) in
> > this industry. Consider also that the stated dpi is the same for
an Epson
> > 3000 as it is for a 1270, but their output is miles apart.
> >
> > Todd
> >
> 
> Todd,
> Is the 'Durst Lambda' a photo output device, as compared to an
inkjet device?
> 
> And if 300 dpi inkjet output was so great and 'invisible' why is it
that
> *nobody* prints out at that gross a (inkjet dot , not pixel)
resolution?
> 
> And the fact that even you acknowledge that there is a difference
in the output
> quality of an Epson 3000 vs 1270 shows that a change in picoliter
droplet size
> can be perceived.
> 
> Harvey Ferdschneider
> partner, SKID Photography, NYC
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]