Yahoo Groups archive
Thread
2004-11-11 by Dean
Hey! I just read on another camera forum that Epson's printers all print at a "native" resolution of 360dpi and that printing at anything else is pointless because the driver just re-samples the image to 360dpi. Is this true? I notice that the you can select select things like "superPhoto-2880" on the driver. Does this refer to how much ink it can squeeze into it's native 360 dots per inch? Slightly confused now. Thanks, Dean
2004-11-11 by Bob Michaels
Go read and digest www.scantips.com It'll teach you all those necessary things you really need to know about dpi and resolution. Even if you shoot digital and are not interested in scanning, understanding resolution is really important. Bob Michaels --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Dean <dean@t...> wrote:
> Hey! > > I just read on another camera forum that Epson's printers all print at a > "native" resolution of 360dpi and that printing at anything else is > pointless because the driver just re-samples the image to 360dpi. Is > this true? > > I notice that the you can select select things like "superPhoto-2880" on > the driver. Does this refer to how much ink it can squeeze into it's > native 360 dots per inch? > > Slightly confused now. > > Thanks, > Dean
2004-11-11 by ellery
Dean, This may not be true. I ran an experiment once with the EX the grandfather of most of the current generation of printer we talk about today. With a scan in file from neg at 2400dpi scan in from a film scanner - the final 8x12'er is 300dpi. Printed once at this setting and then took the file and ran it thru silverfast to upsample the file to 600dpi and 450dpi printed these out. There is a noticeable sharpness and detail visiable issue bwt the 300 and 450 dpi files and 600dpi. Bwt the 450 vs the 600 there is a gain in sharpnes and detail with the 600 but the jump is less visible. However the printing time is roughly double for printing at 600dpi. Conventional wisedom then and still now I think says that there is little to gain from sending files at resolution higher than 360 dpi some suggested a lower figure, as in all things what other determine as acceptable may not be so for your own use. Suggest u try. Using the high resolution setting ie 2880 vs a lower setting and use of media setting ie photographic film will force the inkjet to output less ink. I was routinely printing at 1440 and paper setting at film for most media I ran thru the EX. To me the prints were better at this setting.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dean [mailto:dean@tbc.t-com.ne.jp]
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 8:50 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] dpi and stuff
Hey!
I just read on another camera forum that Epson's printers all print at a
"native" resolution of 360dpi and that printing at anything else is
pointless because the driver just re-samples the image to 360dpi. Is
this true?
I notice that the you can select select things like "superPhoto-2880" on
the driver. Does this refer to how much ink it can squeeze into it's
native 360 dots per inch?
Slightly confused now.
Thanks,
Dean
Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
they are often being updated.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE OWNER AND
MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE OWNER AND
MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]2004-11-11 by Bob Frost
Dean, Epson desktop printers (up to and including the 1280/90 and 2100/2200 all resample your images in the driver to 720ppi. Epson WideFormat printers (3000 and above) all resample to 360dpi. This info is from Epson themselves. Make sure you do not muddle ppi and dpi. Your images are in ppi (pixels per inch) and are resampled to 360 or 720 pixels per inch in the driver. The driver then turns each pixel in your image into several dots of ink, and the size and spacing of those dots of ink is varied when you select 360, 720, 1440, 2880, or 5760 dpi printer resolution in the driver. In some drivers now they don't list these resolutions; they just give you the choice of photo quality, best photo, super photo or some such names to hide the actual resolutions (probably because many people were confusing the printer resolutions with the image resolution). Bob Frost.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dean" <dean@tbc.t-com.ne.jp> I just read on another camera forum that Epson's printers all print at a "native" resolution of 360dpi and that printing at anything else is pointless because the driver just re-samples the image to 360dpi. Is this true? I notice that the you can select select things like "superPhoto-2880" on the driver. Does this refer to how much ink it can squeeze into it's native 360 dots per inch? Slightly confused now.
2004-11-11 by Ernst Dinkla
Bob Frost wrote: > Dean, > > Epson desktop printers (up to and including the 1280/90 and 2100/2200 all > resample your images in the driver to 720ppi. Epson WideFormat printers > (3000 and above) all resample to 360ppi. This info is from Epson themselves. On the Epson 9600, 7600 and 4000 there are some quality settings in the driver that will result in a request for 720 PPI resolution in the Epson driver. Tested that with Qimage which shows the native resolution per driver setting just above the preview. All other Epson Wide Formats are 360 PPI max in native resolution. Whether it shows in the final print is another matter. Ernst
2004-11-11 by Bob Frost
Ernst, Thanks for that info. I was assuming Epson's statement of a year or two ago was still true, but I also read something else that said it would be nice if Epson moved towards 720ppi for the wideformat printers. From what you say, it seems they have. Bob Frost.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ernst Dinkla" <E.Dinkla@...> > > Epson desktop printers (up to and including the 1280/90 and 2100/2200 all > resample your images in the driver to 720ppi. Epson WideFormat printers > (3000 and above) all resample to 360ppi. This info is from Epson > themselves. On the Epson 9600, 7600 and 4000 there are some quality settings in the driver that will result in a request for 720 PPI resolution in the Epson driver. Tested that with Qimage which shows the native resolution per driver setting just above the preview. All other Epson Wide Formats are 360 PPI max in native resolution. Whether it shows in the final print is another matter.
2004-11-12 by Bob Michaels
Bob: interesting as I always though all Epson desktop drivers resampled to 360 dpi. I've never been able to discern a difference between prints I've sent to the printer at 360 dpi and much higher. But, I'll have to send the exact same print at 360 and then at 720 and see if I can tell a difference in the way the print looks. Bob Michaels --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Frost" <bob@f...> wrote: > Dean, > > Epson desktop printers (up to and including the 1280/90 and 2100/2200 all > resample your images in the driver to 720ppi. Epson WideFormat printers > (3000 and above) all resample to 360dpi. This info is from Epson themselves. > > Make sure you do not muddle ppi and dpi. Your images are in ppi (pixels per > inch) and are resampled to 360 or 720 pixels per inch in the driver. The > driver then turns each pixel in your image into several dots of ink, and the > size and spacing of those dots of ink is varied when you select 360, 720, > 1440, 2880, or 5760 dpi printer resolution in the driver. In some drivers > now they don't list these resolutions; they just give you the choice of > photo quality, best photo, super photo or some such names to hide the actual
> resolutions (probably because many people were confusing the printer > resolutions with the image resolution). > > Bob Frost. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dean" <dean@t...> > > I just read on another camera forum that Epson's printers all print at a > "native" resolution of 360dpi and that printing at anything else is > pointless because the driver just re-samples the image to 360dpi. Is > this true? > > I notice that the you can select select things like "superPhoto-2880" on > the driver. Does this refer to how much ink it can squeeze into it's > native 360 dots per inch? > > Slightly confused now.
2004-11-12 by Ernst Dinkla
Bob Michaels wrote: > > Bob: interesting as I always though all Epson desktop drivers > resampled to 360 dpi. I've never been able to discern a difference > between prints I've sent to the printer at 360 dpi and much higher. > But, I'll have to send the exact same print at 360 and then at 720 and > see if I can tell a difference in the way the print looks. > > Bob Michaels For a good test of your printer(s) I recommend this approach: http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/quality/ Seen some other testing described that may not be as reliable. No need to use Qimage, any good imge editor and the Epson/Canon driver will do. Good paper is a must. Ernst
2004-11-12 by Bob Frost
Bob, Several people who have done critical tests say you can see improvements up to about 480ppi or so, depending on which desktop printer you are using. Must do some tests with the R800. Bob Frost.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Michaels" <bob@...> Bob: interesting as I always though all Epson desktop drivers resampled to 360 dpi. I've never been able to discern a difference between prints I've sent to the printer at 360 dpi and much higher. But, I'll have to send the exact same print at 360 and then at 720 and see if I can tell a difference in the way the print looks.
2004-11-12 by B. Campbell
> Make sure you do not muddle ppi and dpi. Your images are in ppi (pixels per > inch) and are resampled to 360 or 720 pixels per inch in the driver. The > driver then turns each pixel in your image into several dots of ink, and the > size and spacing of those dots of ink is varied when you select 360, 720, > 1440, 2880, or 5760 dpi printer resolution in the driver. Hmm. After reading Wayne Fulton's book years ago and thinking I understood all this I'm now muddled. Assume I scan a 4x5 negative at 100% at 1200 ppi. I then open the Image Size window in Photoshop and change the image size to 8x10 without resampling, which changes the ppi from 1200 to 600 ppi (ignore the fact that the image in my 4x5 negative isn't really quite 4x5). I thought that if I then sent the image to the printer, setting the quality in the printer window at 720, 1440, 2880 or whatever depending on how fine wanted the size and spacing of each dot to be, my 8x10 image would print at 600 dpi. (and the spacing and size of each of those 600 dpi would be based on whatever quality I set in the printer window). But if I understand you correctly you're saying that this is incorrect and instead of printing at 600 dpi in the above example my 1280 printer will ignore some setting of mine and instead will always print at 720 ppi (or dpi?). At what point in the process does this occur (i.e. which of my settings does the printer ignore and decide for itself that 720 dpi/ppi is the setting at which it's going to print?).
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Michaels" <bob@...> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:45 PM Subject: Re: [Digital BW] dpi and stuff (snip) Bob Michaels --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Frost" <bob@f...> wrote: > Dean, > > Epson desktop printers (up to and including the 1280/90 and 2100/2200 all > resample your images in the driver to 720ppi. Epson WideFormat printers > (3000 and above) all resample to 360dpi. This info is from Epson themselves. > > Make sure you do not muddle ppi and dpi. Your images are in ppi (pixels per > inch) and are resampled to 360 or 720 pixels per inch in the driver. The > driver then turns each pixel in your image into several dots of ink, and the > size and spacing of those dots of ink is varied when you select 360, 720, > 1440, 2880, or 5760 dpi printer resolution in the driver. In some drivers > now they don't list these resolutions; they just give you the choice of > photo quality, best photo, super photo or some such names to hide the actual > resolutions (probably because many people were confusing the printer > resolutions with the image resolution). > (big snip)
2004-11-12 by Richard Wolfson_
Bob, I think you may be mixing up pixels-per-inch (PPI) and dots-per-inch (DPI). PPI is about your image in Photoshop; DPI is about the dot pattern (dither) the printer driver uses to paint your image on paper. In your example, your image has 4800 x 6000 total pixels. When you change the image size without resampling, Photoshop changes the PPI accordingly, from 1200 to 600, since the total pixels don't change. When you send the image to the printer, the driver uses your image size & PPI to print the image the right size. And it uses the driver settings to determine the DPI -- lots of tiny dots for highest quality but slower printing, or fewer, larger dots for faster printing with (possibly) less quality. If you send the printer, say, 240 PPI and print at 1440 DPI, each pixel you send the printer turns into many dots. Hope this helps. Richard Wolfson Fine Art Photographer Digital Imaging Consultant Harvard Massachusetts USA rw at RichardWolfson.com
> -----Original Message----- > From: B. Campbell [mailto:bellis60@...] > Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 10:00 AM > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] dpi and stuff > > > > Make sure you do not muddle ppi and dpi. Your images are in ppi > (pixels per > > inch) and are resampled to 360 or 720 pixels per inch in the driver. > The > > driver then turns each pixel in your image into several dots of ink, > and the > > size and spacing of those dots of ink is varied when you select 360, > 720, > > 1440, 2880, or 5760 dpi printer resolution in the driver. > > Hmm. After reading Wayne Fulton's book years ago and thinking > I understood all this I'm now muddled. Assume I scan a 4x5 > negative at 100% at 1200 ppi. > I then open the Image Size window in Photoshop and change the > image size to 8x10 without resampling, which changes the ppi > from 1200 to 600 ppi (ignore the fact that the image in my > 4x5 negative isn't really quite 4x5). I thought that if I > then sent the image to the printer, setting the quality in > the printer window at 720, 1440, 2880 or whatever depending > on how fine wanted the size and spacing of each dot to be, my > 8x10 image would print at 600 dpi. (and the spacing and size > of each of those 600 dpi would be based on whatever quality I > set in the printer window). > > But if I understand you correctly you're saying that this is > incorrect and instead of printing at 600 dpi in the above > example my 1280 printer will ignore some setting of mine and > instead will always print at 720 ppi (or dpi?). At what point > in the process does this occur (i.e. which of my settings > does the printer ignore and decide for itself that 720 > dpi/ppi is the setting at which it's going to print?). > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bob Michaels" <bob@...> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:45 PM > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] dpi and stuff > > (snip) > > Bob Michaels > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m, "Bob Frost" > <bob@f...> wrote: > > Dean, > > > > Epson desktop printers (up to and including the 1280/90 and > 2100/2200 all > > resample your images in the driver to 720ppi. Epson WideFormat > > printers (3000 and above) all resample to 360dpi. This info is from > > Epson > themselves. > > > > Make sure you do not muddle ppi and dpi. Your images are in ppi > (pixels per > > inch) and are resampled to 360 or 720 pixels per inch in the driver. > The > > driver then turns each pixel in your image into several dots of ink, > and the > > size and spacing of those dots of ink is varied when you select 360, > 720, > > 1440, 2880, or 5760 dpi printer resolution in the driver. In some > drivers > > now they don't list these resolutions; they just give you > the choice > > of photo quality, best photo, super photo or some such names to hide > the actual > > resolutions (probably because many people were confusing > the printer > > resolutions with the image resolution). > > > (big snip) > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. > Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. > Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! > http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/ucIolB/TM > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------~-> > > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other > resources as they are often being updated. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint > > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or > you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership > preferences by visiting this same page. > > Please follow these basic guidelines: > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier > messages to keep them short. > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks > or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be > removed from the membership without notice. > - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of > digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic > posts may be removed from the membership. > - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group > rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and > decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See "Group > Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ > > BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL > BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE > THAT THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT > YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, > INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY > DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF > PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN > IF THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT > YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH > DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE > THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED > ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) > STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, > THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO > THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > >
2004-11-12 by Bob Frost
Bob, Yes, when you send an image at 600ppi to an Epson 1280 printer using the Epson driver, your image is upsampled to 720ppi by the driver using Nearest Neighbour interpolation (unless the driver has other options such as DCC which use a better interpolation). If you sent it an image at 1200 ppi (half the size without resampling) it would be downsampled by the driver to 720ppi. Then the driver would turn the image into dots and print at whatever quality(printer resolution) you chose (720,1440,2880, 5760dpi). Epson mentions these 'input ppi' on page 24 Note 2 of http://files.support.epson.com/pdf/pro10a/pro10aps.pdf Other inkjet manufacturers apparently use different input values. Bob Frost.
----- Original Message ----- From: "B. Campbell" <bellis60@...> I thought that if I then sent the image to the printer, setting the quality in the printer window at 720, 1440, 2880 or whatever depending on how fine wanted the size and spacing of each dot to be, my 8x10 image would print at 600 dpi. (and the spacing and size of each of those 600 dpi would be based on whatever quality I set in the printer window). But if I understand you correctly you're saying that this is incorrect and instead of printing at 600 dpi in the above example my 1280 printer will ignore some setting of mine and instead will always print at 720 ppi (or dpi?). At what point in the process does this occur (i.e. which of my settings does the printer ignore and decide for itself that 720 dpi/ppi is the setting at which it's going to print?).
2004-11-13 by B. Campbell
"Yes, when you send an image at 600ppi to an Epson 1280 printer using the Epson driver, your image is upsampled to 720ppi by the driver using Nearest Neighbour interpolation (unless the driver has other options such as DCC which use a better interpolation). If you sent it an image at 1200 ppi (half the size without resampling) it would be downsampled by the driver to 720ppi. Then the driver would turn the image into dots and print at whatever quality(printer resolution) you chose (720,1440,2880, 5760dpi)." Thanks. So it really doesn't matter what I send to the printer, the printer will always upsample or downsample to 720 dpi. I never knew that, I always thought the printer printed the same dpi as the ppi I sent to it, e.g. if I sent it 600 ppi it would print 600 dpi at whatever printer resolution I chose. I assume though that it's still better to send more ppi to it so that the amount of upsampling is minimized or is that not correct either?
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Frost" <bob@...> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 12:37 PM Subject: Re: [Digital BW] dpi and stuff Yes, when you send an image at 600ppi to an Epson 1280 printer using the Epson driver, your image is upsampled to 720ppi by the driver using Nearest Neighbour interpolation (unless the driver has other options such as DCC which use a better interpolation). If you sent it an image at 1200 ppi (half the size without resampling) it would be downsampled by the driver to 720ppi. Then the driver would turn the image into dots and print at whatever quality(printer resolution) you chose (720,1440,2880, 5760dpi). Epson mentions these 'input ppi' on page 24 Note 2 of http://files.support.epson.com/pdf/pro10a/pro10aps.pdf Other inkjet manufacturers apparently use different input values. Bob Frost. -
2004-11-13 by Tom Baker
>"...Thanks. So it really doesn't matter what I send to the printer, the printer >will always upsample or downsample to 720 dpi. ..." It does matter what dpi you send to the printer. Usually 360 for 16x20 or so, and as low as 200 dpi for large prints. If you send too low a dpi you will get inferior results in the final print. There is some debate about this, but not much from a practical perspective. Tom Baker [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2004-11-13 by Jerry in Houston
This thread has been very informative for me. I use a 1280 using the MIS UT2 CFS ink system and PS 7.0.1. I went into PS and noted that I routinely size my images to their final print size using the PS Image Size function at a final resolution of 720ppi and the resample set at Bicubic, before sending to print using the Epson driver. In the Epson driver I routinely print at a final print resolution of 1440 dpi. I am thinking that since the image is already set at 720ppi in PS there is no need for the driver to resample and it will remain as PS left it before applying the 1440dpi. Am I right in this? Jerry in Houston <<"Yes, when you send an image at 600ppi to an Epson 1280 printer using the Epson driver, your image is upsampled to 720ppi by the driver using Nearest Neighbour interpolation (unless the driver has other options such as DCC which use a better interpolation). If you sent it an image at 1200 ppi (half the size without resampling) it would be downsampled by the driver to 720ppi. Then the driver would turn the image into dots and print at whatever quality(printer resolution) you chose (720,1440,2880, 5760dpi).">>
2004-11-13 by Ernst Dinkla
B. Campbell wrote: > Hmm. After reading Wayne Fulton's book years ago and thinking I understood > all this I'm now muddled. Assume I scan a 4x5 negative at 100% at 1200 ppi. > I then open the Image Size window in Photoshop and change the image size to > 8x10 without resampling, which changes the ppi from 1200 to 600 ppi (ignore > the fact that the image in my 4x5 negative isn't really quite 4x5). I > thought that if I then sent the image to the printer, setting the quality in > the printer window at 720, 1440, 2880 or whatever depending on how fine > wanted the size and spacing of each dot to be, my 8x10 image would print at > 600 dpi. (and the spacing and size of each of those 600 dpi would be based > on whatever quality I set in the printer window). > > But if I understand you correctly you're saying that this is incorrect and > instead of printing at 600 dpi in the above example my 1280 printer will > ignore some setting of mine and instead will always print at 720 ppi (or > dpi?). At what point in the process does this occur (i.e. which of my > settings does the printer ignore and decide for itself that 720 dpi/ppi is > the setting at which it's going to print?). You can't call it "ignore", the process in the driver to print at a certain DPI requires a related PPI number image at some point. The Epson printer drivers will internally rasterise the image to either 360 or 720 PPI with a crude bicubic interpolation (or worse with older drivers). After that the image is split up to the different ink channels on the DPI print resolution set. By feeding the driver a resolution of 360 or 720 PPI you can avoid the extra inter/extrapolation in the driver. Qimage solves that issue in an elegant way, it checks the desired native resolution (API-Windows) and samples up or down with the best algorithms available today and feeds that to the driver. If desired it also adds print sharpening, something you will like to have in the print but not in your file. So with Qimage you better keep the resolution in your file that you got with scanning (or from your digital camera) and avoid up or down sampling in the editor which usually will do a worse job than Qimage. There's a huge difference between DPI and PPI. If you want to print at 600 DPI you need a Canon, HP or alike which are based on a 150-300 ---- 1200 range of DPI resolution numbers. The Epsons, Rolands, Mutohs have a range of 180-360 ---- 1440 etc range of DPI. Stay above 1000 DPI and it doesn't matter what range you choose. Ernst
2004-11-13 by Bob Michaels
Jerry: I find that if I scan at a resolution that give me something around 360 ppi in the desired print size, never resample in PS, and just send whatever resolution I have to my 1280, I get prints as good as they ever get. This means scanning at less than my scanners max resolution, faster scans, smaller files, faster workflow, and the same maximum print quality. Bob Michaels --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Jerry in Houston <glewis4457@y...> wrote:
> This thread has been very informative for me. I use a > 1280 using the MIS UT2 CFS ink system and PS 7.0.1. > > I went into PS and noted that I routinely size my > images to their final print size using the PS Image > Size function at a final resolution of 720ppi and the > resample set at Bicubic, before sending to print using > the Epson driver. In the Epson driver I routinely > print at a final print resolution of 1440 dpi. I am > thinking that since the image is already set at 720ppi > in PS there is no need for the driver to resample and > it will remain as PS left it before applying the > 1440dpi. Am I right in this? > > Jerry in Houston > > > <<"Yes, when you send an image at 600ppi to an Epson > 1280 printer using the Epson driver, your image is > upsampled to 720ppi by the driver using Nearest > Neighbour interpolation (unless the driver has other > options such as DCC which use a better interpolation). > If you sent it an image at 1200 ppi (half the size > without resampling) it would be downsampled by the > driver to 720ppi. Then the driver would turn the image > into dots and print at whatever > quality(printer resolution) you chose (720,1440,2880, > 5760dpi).">>
2004-11-13 by Ernst Dinkla
Jerry in Houston wrote: > I am > thinking that since the image is already set at 720ppi > in PS there is no need for the driver to resample and > it will remain as PS left it before applying the > 1440dpi. Am I right in this? Yes, but 360 PPI might be as good in print quality, is faster, takes less space, so try it. Ernst
2004-11-13 by Bob Frost
Bob,
Several of us had a long discussion on this subject on the Epson_printers
list about 2 or 3 yrs ago with Kennedy McEwan (if you search the archives
for him, you will find them).
Summarising these discussions:-
Question -
Is there a magic number eg. 360 ppi for sending images to the printer?
Kennedy -
"The Epson Stylus Photo printer range all resample the image to 720ppi
in
the printer driver so, in principle there is a theoretical advantage to
setting the output ppi to an integer division of this - eg. 360ppi.
However, unless your image contains high modulation at the limiting
resolution (which it certainly won't if you are scanning film at
4000ppi) then it doesn't really matter - there just aren't enough
harmonics present in the image to produce irrational resampling
artifacts."
Question -
If the printer driver is going to resample to 720 ppi (desktop printers)
and PS does a better job of resampling than the Epson driver, then why don't
you recommend that we all resample our images in PS to 720 ppi before
sending them to the printer?
Kennedy -
"Several reasons, some of which are just as relevant as always, but
others become less relevant as the technology moves on. In that latter
category are definitely issues about file size and processing speed. A
couple of years ago with less than 100MB being a lot of memory and
processor speeds of the time, resampling to 720ppi would have been an
unnecessary burden - if at all practical for many systems to cope with.
With todays speeds and memory allocations, that is not as much of an
issue, but a lot of machines will still struggle.
In the former category are consequences of the stochastic dither
algorithm used by Epson, which can produce unwanted fine detail
enhancement if sent data at full resolution. This can often result in
unexpected granularity in the image which is similar but not the same as
grain aliasing. Another aspect is the printer settings itself which may
result in a slight scaling if set incorrectly, resulting in very large
alias patterns which are well within visible resolution limits with
720ppi source material."
Question -
OK then, what ppi should we send to the printer?
Kennedy -
"as long as the resolution is between 240 and 480ppi,
then I just use what I end up with. If it is less than 240ppi or more
than 480ppi then I use bicubic resampling to get 360ppi. If it is also
greater than 720ppi, then I select 720ppi as the target, but this only
occurs for small prints with the source equipment I use."
Nothing in life seems simple, does it?
Bob Frost.----- Original Message ----- From: "B. Campbell" <bellis60@...> So it really doesn't matter what I send to the printer, the printer will always upsample or downsample to 720 dpi. I never knew that, I always thought the printer printed the same dpi as the ppi I sent to it, e.g. if I sent it 600 ppi it would print 600 dpi at whatever printer resolution I chose. I assume though that it's still better to send more ppi to it so that the amount of upsampling is minimized or is that not correct either?
2004-11-13 by Bob Frost
Jerry, See my last post, where Kennedy says that sending the image to the driver at 720ppi can have some bad effects. May not, but could! As Ernst says, QImage does this routinely, so perhaps these possible disadvantages are not common. Bob Frost.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry in Houston" <glewis4457@...> I am thinking that since the image is already set at 720ppi in PS there is no need for the driver to resample and it will remain as PS left it before applying the 1440dpi. Am I right in this?
2004-11-13 by B. Campbell
Thanks for your detailed explanation and the ones others have sent, I now get it.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ernst Dinkla" <E.Dinkla@...> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 6:28 AM Subject: Re: [Digital BW] dpi and stuff B. Campbell wrote: > Hmm. After reading Wayne Fulton's book years ago and thinking I understood > all this I'm now muddled. Assume I scan a 4x5 negative at 100% at 1200 ppi. > I then open the Image Size window in Photoshop and change the image size to > 8x10 without resampling, which changes the ppi from 1200 to 600 ppi (ignore > the fact that the image in my 4x5 negative isn't really quite 4x5). I > thought that if I then sent the image to the printer, setting the quality in > the printer window at 720, 1440, 2880 or whatever depending on how fine > wanted the size and spacing of each dot to be, my 8x10 image would print at > 600 dpi. (and the spacing and size of each of those 600 dpi would be based > on whatever quality I set in the printer window). > > But if I understand you correctly you're saying that this is incorrect and > instead of printing at 600 dpi in the above example my 1280 printer will > ignore some setting of mine and instead will always print at 720 ppi (or > dpi?). At what point in the process does this occur (i.e. which of my > settings does the printer ignore and decide for itself that 720 dpi/ppi is > the setting at which it's going to print?). You can't call it "ignore", the process in the driver to print at a certain DPI requires a related PPI number image at some point. The Epson printer drivers will internally rasterise the image to either 360 or 720 PPI with a crude bicubic interpolation (or worse with older drivers). After that the image is split up to the different ink channels on the DPI print resolution set. By feeding the driver a resolution of 360 or 720 PPI you can avoid the extra inter/extrapolation in the driver. Qimage solves that issue in an elegant way, it checks the desired native resolution (API-Windows) and samples up or down with the best algorithms available today and feeds that to the driver. If desired it also adds print sharpening, something you will like to have in the print but not in your file. So with Qimage you better keep the resolution in your file that you got with scanning (or from your digital camera) and avoid up or down sampling in the editor which usually will do a worse job than Qimage. There's a huge difference between DPI and PPI. If you want to print at 600 DPI you need a Canon, HP or alike which are based on a 150-300 ---- 1200 range of DPI resolution numbers. The Epsons, Rolands, Mutohs have a range of 180-360 ---- 1440 etc range of DPI. Stay above 1000 DPI and it doesn't matter what range you choose. Ernst Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page. Please follow these basic guidelines: - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short. - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice. - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership. - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. Yahoo! Groups Links
2004-11-13 by B. Campbell
"It does matter what dpi you send to the printer. Usually 360 for 16x20 or so, and as low as 200 dpi for large prints. If you send too low a dpi you will get inferior results in the final print. There is some debate about this, but not much from a practical perspective." Thanks, that's what I thought. But why would I send 360 dpi for 16x20 or so prints and "as low as 200 dpi for large prints" (assuming that by "large" you mean larger than 16x20)?
----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Baker" <tbaker1328@...> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 7:37 PM Subject: Re: [Digital BW] dpi and stuff >"...Thanks. So it really doesn't matter what I send to the printer, the printer >will always upsample or downsample to 720 dpi. ..." It does matter what dpi you send to the printer. Usually 360 for 16x20 or so, and as low as 200 dpi for large prints. If you send too low a dpi you will get inferior results in the final print. There is some debate about this, but not much from a practical perspective. Tom Baker [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page. Please follow these basic guidelines: - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short. - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice. - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership. - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. Yahoo! Groups Links
2004-11-13 by Bob Michaels
Bob Frost: I remember Kennedy McEwan and that discussion. Didn't he eventually get kicked off the Epson printer group for abusive comments? My real life conclusions were similar to Kennedy's: anywhere around 360 ppi seems to work as good as anything. Bob Michaels --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Frost" <bob@f...> wrote: > Bob, > > Several of us had a long discussion on this subject on the Epson_printers > list about 2 or 3 yrs ago with Kennedy McEwan (if you search the archives > for him, you will find them). > > Summarising these discussions:- > > Question - > Is there a magic number eg. 360 ppi for sending images to the printer? > > Kennedy - > "The Epson Stylus Photo printer range all resample the image to 720ppi > in > the printer driver so, in principle there is a theoretical advantage to > setting the output ppi to an integer division of this - eg. 360ppi. > However, unless your image contains high modulation at the limiting > resolution (which it certainly won't if you are scanning film at > 4000ppi) then it doesn't really matter - there just aren't enough > harmonics present in the image to produce irrational resampling > artifacts." > > > Question - > If the printer driver is going to resample to 720 ppi (desktop printers) > and PS does a better job of resampling than the Epson driver, then why don't
> you recommend that we all resample our images in PS to 720 ppi before > sending them to the printer? > > Kennedy - > "Several reasons, some of which are just as relevant as always, but > others become less relevant as the technology moves on. In that latter > category are definitely issues about file size and processing speed. A > couple of years ago with less than 100MB being a lot of memory and > processor speeds of the time, resampling to 720ppi would have been an > unnecessary burden - if at all practical for many systems to cope with. > With todays speeds and memory allocations, that is not as much of an > issue, but a lot of machines will still struggle. > In the former category are consequences of the stochastic dither > algorithm used by Epson, which can produce unwanted fine detail > enhancement if sent data at full resolution. This can often result in > unexpected granularity in the image which is similar but not the same as > grain aliasing. Another aspect is the printer settings itself which may > result in a slight scaling if set incorrectly, resulting in very large > alias patterns which are well within visible resolution limits with > 720ppi source material." > > > Question - > OK then, what ppi should we send to the printer? > > Kennedy - > "as long as the resolution is between 240 and 480ppi, > then I just use what I end up with. If it is less than 240ppi or more > than 480ppi then I use bicubic resampling to get 360ppi. If it is also > greater than 720ppi, then I select 720ppi as the target, but this only > occurs for small prints with the source equipment I use." > > > > Nothing in life seems simple, does it? > > Bob Frost.
2004-11-14 by Ernst Dinkla
Bob Michaels wrote: > Bob Frost: I remember Kennedy McEwan and that discussion. Didn't he > eventually get kicked off the Epson printer group for abusive comments? If that happened I'm sure that the road to the abusive comments was paved with logic stones :-) I don't remember an accident like that on the Leben list if that's the one you mean. Ernst
2004-11-14 by lulalake_1999
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Dinkla <E.Dinkla@c...> wrote: > Bob Michaels wrote: > > > Bob Frost: I remember Kennedy McEwan and that discussion. Didn't he > > eventually get kicked off the Epson printer group for abusive comments? > > If that happened I'm sure that the road to the abusive comments > was paved with logic stones :-) LOL! That's verry funny Ernst. I'll remember that one. Thanks Jules
> I don't remember an accident like that on the Leben list if > that's the one you mean. > > Ernst