QTR-Quadtone RIP

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@t...> wrote:
> --- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" <roy@h...> wrote:
> ...
> > Another factor that I'm beginning to think is also more important is the
> > variable dotsize of the printers.  My main printer has been the 7500
> which has
> > only one drop size and linearity has always been very smooth.  But
> my smaller
> > printers are all variable dot and I think that may be a large factor
> in their more
> > bumpy linearity per ink.
> 
> Yes! Seeing that here too...
> Basically, with the x600s and SP, variable dot can't be linearized
> with over two partitions. At least I haven't been able to do it.

From what I've gathered so far the transitions between dropsizes is easily
as crucial as the transitions between inks.  Unless both are done smoothly
as based on the relative densities/dropsizes it awful difficult to compensate
later on in the linearization.

> They're going to have to make it happen for the x800s though, somehow,
> with the K3s.
> What I'd really like... not vareiable, but to have different dots
> sizes available in different inks.
> For example- Give me the smallest size, particularly in the highlight
> inks, but then give me your largest size for the skeletal black for
> the best dmax. But you can leave each ink non-variable, make sense?
> Doable?

No exactly.  You have to select one set of dropsizes per print.  But there's a
lot of potential and need for selecting which dropsizes to use where.  One
thing that I've figured out lately is that too many small dots are bad.  They
tend to show banding -- mixing the sizes is important, even when the dots
may show a little more.  (Banding is worse than dots).

Roy

> Tyler