Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: DougBG on May 12, 2009, 12:08:31 pm
-
The Z3200 User Guide describes two possible rendering resolutions, either 300 or 600 PPI. I normally send an image to the printer at or near a resolution of 240 PPI. I am happy with the results of the printer driver's rendering of that image resolution. What are your thoughts about up sampling in PS (if required) to match the minimum rendering resolution of 300PPI? 600PPI? To my eye it doesn't seem required
-
The Z3200 User Guide describes two possible rendering resolutions, either 300 or 600 PPI. I normally send an image to the printer at or near a resolution of 240 PPI. I am happy with the results of the printer driver's rendering of that image resolution. What are your thoughts about up sampling in PS (if required) to match the minimum rendering resolution of 300PPI? 600PPI? To my eye it doesn't seem required
You're talking two unrelated numbers. The image resolution of 240 ppi that you're sending to the printer from Photoshop is just the 'number of dots' in the image, and anything above 240 (or even 180) will print pretty well. Supposedly the nominal incoming image resolution the HP printers are set up to handle is 300 ppi.
The "rendering resolution" of 300 or 600 ppi is a completely separate issue. This has to do (I believe) with the dithering algorithms applied by the printer, and they are actually rather arbitrary numbers. My personal experience with the HP Z3100 is that the higher resolution setting of 600 ppi avoids the banding I'll otherwise occasionally see on long panoramic prints with glossier papers. I can't see much difference on rag/matte papers.
Hope that helps.
-
I thought the internal screening was done at 1200 ppi but sent to the pens at 300 or 600 dpi?
In any case there will be some interpolation happening to scale the 240 ppi to 300 then internally from 300 to 1200 for masking. You would not see much difference though other than in solid gradient fills, or perhaps diagonal lines depending on the frequency.
In my experience HP does an excellent job at scaling, I've not seen better yet (well Qimage of course) with other printer drivers.
-
The Z3200 User Guide describes two possible rendering resolutions, either 300 or 600 PPI. I normally send an image to the printer at or near a resolution of 240 PPI. I am happy with the results of the printer driver's rendering of that image resolution. What are your thoughts about up sampling in PS (if required) to match the minimum rendering resolution of 300PPI? 600PPI? To my eye it doesn't seem required
Qimage may make a difference but in general the driver's upsampling is one of the best. Like with other drivers downsampling may give more embarrasing results, say a near 600 PPI file printed at normal quality = 300 PPI native resolution. Strange things happen then with textures or scanned film grain. Qimage has an anti-aliasing filter on its downsampling that can help, the driver doesn't.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla
New: Dinkla Canvas Wrap Actions for Photoshop
http://www.pigment-print.com/dinklacanvaswraps/index.html (http://www.pigment-print.com/dinklacanvaswraps/index.html)