Thanks for the link to my previous post.
But I'm not sure of your statement "My understand of OS X is that the resampling
performed by the printing pipeline is best avoided." I've never heard of this or
seen any evidence of this.
Personally, almost all of my images work out to the 360range and I just
send it as is to QTR driver or any other driver as is (OSX). Making things exact
if you are really exact is fine but being off by a tiny bit due to roundoffs etc is
likely to be bad -- i.e. 720.03 PPI is bad and you may not know about it. Also
positioning on an exact 1/720in boundary is easy to screw up.
Roy
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 1:32 PM, brian_downunda@... [QuadtoneRIP] <QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
See https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/QuadtoneRIP/conversations/messages/12631
My understanding based on this is that QTR expects 720. On Windows if it receives more or less than this then QTR itself resamples to 720. On OS X this resampling is done by the OS printing pipeline. My experience on Windows is that the resampling performed by QTR is fine, although you can get slightly better results by resizing in Qimage, but you have to examine the print under a loop to see it. My understand of OS X is that the resampling performed by the printing pipeline is best avoided.