Digital BW, The Print

In a message dated 5/5/02 8:20:48 PM, dellaellingson@... writes:

>This is simple. Your scans need improvement. Others
>see the difference. CD Tobie is also an expert <wanders off into unnecessary 
mudslinging...>

Scans are indeed a rather noisy type of file compared to vector art converted 
to bitmap; but the other factor here... which I brought up in a different 
(poorly titled) post is that line pairs only define one bit black and white 
resolution, not gradient capacity or resolution in high bit files, and adding 
more gray inks by common sense do not improve your blacks, only your grays. 
If you want a finer resolution as defined by a one bit file, you would add 
more black inks and write the driver accordingly; if you want smoother grays, 
and more levels of gray, then the Cone system makes sense. But it will be 
much harder to quantify than one bit file resolution.

C. David Tobie
Design Cooperative
CDTobie@...

Paul Roark wrote:

>>My resolution tests sure do not show an advantage to
the Piezo driver with
>>respect to the detail that can be printed. See the
scan of test prints that
>>had high resolution line pairs. The image file name
is "Piezo-Epson
>>Resolution Test.jpg."


Della wrote,

>This is simple. Your scans need improvement. ...

The original resolution test files were not scan files, but made in
Photoshop -- no MTF or other image degradation.

The scans of the printed test strips were done on an Epson Expression Pro at
1600 dpi -- way beyond what the printers can do.  The scans agree with what
I saw with a magnifier.

The results were also the same when the dark line density was changed to 50%
as opposed to 100%, for what it's worth.

I might add that I think I produced sharper test prints with an older Piezo
driver.  I think the various attempts to hide the microbanding has reduced
the final print sharpness a bit.

So, sorry, it's not so simple.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

(PS - I now use a Nikon 8000 film scanner and use an X-Rite Swatchbook for
the curves that I do in-house.)

At 05:20 PM 5/5/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>Paul Raork wrote:
>
>>My resolution tests sure do not show an advantage to
>the Piezo driver with
>>respect to the detail that can be printed. See the
>scan of test prints that
>>had high resolution line pairs. The image file name
>is "Piezo-Epson
>>Resolution Test.jpg."
>
>
>Paul,
>
>This is simple. Your scans need improvement. Others
>see the difference. CD Tobie is also an expert
>(perhaps more expert than you though this is not worth
>an argument. I just notice his credentials are
>official). It is very clear to him that his experience
>is different than yours. If you are using a flatbed
>scanner or a CCD scanner, you should be using a drum
>scanner. Anyone as expert in their field as you are is
>more appreciated when their prints quality is enhanced
>by that of a quality drum scan. I realize the
>convenience of your flatbed. I use one too but only
>for quick prints or for the web. Drum scans are a
>bargain in NYC. Also the way you rely on  your scanner
>to make judgements as you do is, I think that you are
>in risky business that way, but this is another story.
>You should also buy a densitometer (my opinion). But
>for your own work in which you place importance, your
>peers will notice if you switch to drum scan. If you
>have tried drum scan and you still can not to see the
>difference, then you need to use a professional format
>of film, as 6x7cm or larger. Otherwise, you are
>limited by the size of the film's grain. But I am sure
>this is obvious to you. If not, then I gave you the
>expert a tip! Move over you guys. :)
>
>-della
>
>
Della,

Yours is another example, if I correctly understand you, of size matters
arrogance.  Nobody who understands photography believes that small format
photography can match tonality and sharpness larger formats especially when
printed at large sizes. The point is that the majority of work is done in
the smaller formats and they are fully capable of producing excellent images
and prints for that format. I get the impression from some that they walk
around with a loupe and a densitometer in their pocket looking at data
rather than photographs. I scan and print a lot of nice little images from
35mm with simple equipment that holds it own with large-format work, as do
my compadres. If I were to switch to drum scans, I'd not see a worthwhile
improvment to offset the huge investment in time and money. 

AZ
Maker of Lookaround panoramic camera.
http://www.panoramacamera.us
         or
keyword.com lookaround