My point is that the driver has to convert it to the dot grid - there are always conversions taking place. You will almost never have an exact number of dots or exact dot alignment even if you start with the English system. Its all arbitrary and the dot grid causes fractional dots to be truncate or rounded up. You will always have fractional dots to deal with - metric or English. I doubt seriously that there is less precision (or more loss) when starting with metric. There's a lot wrong with the English system but this isn't one of them. I'll stick to my 567 DPCM printer (er, 1440 DPI) with its tiny fractional dot inaccuracies. I much prefer my 10 mil traces being 14 dots wide with a max of 0.07% error - probably better than the accuracy of TT. --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Trethan <stefan_trethan@g...> wrote: > On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 18:24:52 -0000, Phil <phil1960us@y...> wrote: > > > I'm not so sure that a 7 mil trace is going to come out that well on > > a 300 dpi device. that is basically 2 dots wide (2.1 to be exact but > > it doesn't do partial dots). that isn't very much toner. 10 mils is 3 > > dots and that's still kind of light. > > > > yes, correct, IF you draw the lines on a grid in mil. > if yo have metric grid (e.g. metric spaced flatpack) > the driver must convert it, and will make alternating two or three dot > traces, > same with space between traces. > Things get ugly and irregular. > > both 2 dot and 3 dot traces come out well, it doesn't do one dot but i > think it does one-dot with very small fonts, which still come out well. > > > st
Message
Re: DPI and alignment. (was staples paper topic)
2004-07-02 by Phil
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.