Digital BW, The Print

Sarah,

> I think there must be a slight difference between the 2400 and the 4800
> drivers

According to Epson, all their desktop printers (including R2400) resample 
images to 720ppi in the driver. Large format printers (3000 upwards) 
resample to 360ppi normally, but recent models apparently have the option of 
resampling to 720ppi, which is what the Fine Detail checkbox gives you. So 
it's not needed on the R2400.

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sarah Thompson" <sarah@...>

Bob Frost wrote:
> Sarah,
>
>   
>> I think there must be a slight difference between the 2400 and the 4800
>> drivers
>>     
>
> According to Epson, all their desktop printers (including R2400) resample 
> images to 720ppi in the driver. Large format printers (3000 upwards) 
> resample to 360ppi normally, but recent models apparently have the option of 
> resampling to 720ppi, which is what the Fine Detail checkbox gives you. So 
> it's not needed on the R2400.
>
> Bob Frost.
>   
Aha, mystery solved. It makes a lot of sense actually, since not many 
source images have anything like that resolution when scaled to the 
sizes normally printed on the larger printers.

Thanks for that,
Sarah

Is this hardware/firmware controlled or is it done by the Epson  
driver software?  Do 3rd party drivers (RIPs) such as Imageprint,  
ColorBurst, QTR, etc. also re-sample to 720ppi in small format  
printers and 360ppi in large format?

Carl

On Jul 17, 2007, at 9:52 AM, Sarah Thompson wrote:

> Bob Frost wrote:
>> Sarah,
>>
>>
>>> I think there must be a slight difference between the 2400 and  
>>> the 4800
>>> drivers
>>>
>>
>> According to Epson, all their desktop printers (including R2400)  
>> resample
>> images to 720ppi in the driver. Large format printers (3000 upwards)
>> resample to 360ppi normally, but recent models apparently have the  
>> option of
>> resampling to 720ppi, which is what the Fine Detail checkbox gives  
>> you. So
>> it's not needed on the R2400.
>>
>> Bob Frost.
>>
> Aha, mystery solved. It makes a lot of sense actually, since not many
> source images have anything like that resolution when scaled to the
> sizes normally printed on the larger printers.
>
> Thanks for that,
> Sarah

Carl Schofield wrote:
> Is this hardware/firmware controlled or is it done by the Epson  
> driver software?  Do 3rd party drivers (RIPs) such as Imageprint,  
> ColorBurst, QTR, etc. also re-sample to 720ppi in small format  
> printers and 360ppi in large format?
>
> Carl
>   
It's an Epson driver thing, though as I understand it this is a common 
approach to most inkjet drivers. RIPs may not necessarily have the same 
limitations because they can sidestep the normal printer driver 
mechanism in the OS to control the printer directly.

Sarah

Using the Qimage test image (see link earlier in thread) I confirmed that
on my 4800 with IP prints at 360 not 720 and no 720 option as far as I can
tell, so I suspect it does the same on 2400. Note the reason I think that
720 is not default on the bigger printers is as Sarah said, hard to get the
resolution for a big print, so you want to avoid 720 by default as the
driver will use a huge amount memory and processing time prepping an image
for 720dpi printing with no visual gain.

However IP does use support 16bit images (so my spectro tells me, though I
can't actually see a 1/65536 difference).
I can visually see 1/1024 (10) bits in the most sensitive part (to my eye)
of the tonal range, but I've yet to see it make a difference in a real
image.

Mike


On 17/07/07, Carl Schofield <list@...> wrote:
>
>   Is this hardware/firmware controlled or is it done by the Epson
> driver software? Do 3rd party drivers (RIPs) such as Imageprint,
> ColorBurst, QTR, etc. also re-sample to 720ppi in small format
> printers and 360ppi in large format?
>
> Carl
>
> On Jul 17, 2007, at 9:52 AM, Sarah Thompson wrote:
>
> > Bob Frost wrote:
> >> Sarah,
> >>
> >>
> >>> I think there must be a slight difference between the 2400 and
> >>> the 4800
> >>> drivers
> >>>
> >>
> >> According to Epson, all their desktop printers (including R2400)
> >> resample
> >> images to 720ppi in the driver. Large format printers (3000 upwards)
> >> resample to 360ppi normally, but recent models apparently have the
> >> option of
> >> resampling to 720ppi, which is what the Fine Detail checkbox gives
> >> you. So
> >> it's not needed on the R2400.
> >>
> >> Bob Frost.
> >>
> > Aha, mystery solved. It makes a lot of sense actually, since not many
> > source images have anything like that resolution when scaled to the
> > sizes normally printed on the larger printers.
> >
> > Thanks for that,
> > Sarah
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Carl,

> Is this hardware/firmware controlled or is it done by the Epson
> driver software?

By the driver AFAIK. And Canon and HP printers usually resample to 600ppi 
(and 300?) I think.

Not sure about 3rdparty drivers. I used to use ImagePrint with a 2100, and 
seem to remember it gave me a choice of 360 or 720. But it has a default 
setting for each printer type which you are advised to use for best quality.

Bob Frost.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Carl Schofield" <list@...>