I have a 6100 that I've had for about a couple of weeks. I'm still playing with the settings, trying to get use to it, but I've found that, regardless of whether I use the plug-in or print driver, I get roughly the same results with images at 300 dpi. Previously, I owned Epson, so I used 240, 300 and 360 at my dpi dettings. With the Canon, since it's resolution is based on 600dpi, you should be fine with 300.
Don't know if this helps, but it's my 2-cents.
Nemo
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206073\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks.
I tried a couple of different things over the weekend.
I tried the following with a Canon 5D file - printed on A2 Ilford Gold Fibre Silk paper.
Method 1. Open image in CS3 and Uprez the image in CS3 200% by doubling the pixels using Bicubic Smoother. Let the PPI float. Apply PhotoKit Super Sharpener 1 twice. This is the reccomended method by Jeff Schewe in From Camera to print for uprezing images - I did not apply Film Grain 200 as per From Camera to Print. Then I sized it to suit the paper by changing the DPI [was approx 250DPI] without resampling and applied PhotoKit Output sharpeningas appropriate. Then sent to the CS3 16 bit plugin. Result in print - looks over sharpened to my eye and more so that seems to have picked up some nasty artifacts here and there. From a distance print looks ok, but pixel peeping its got some issues. This particular shot has heaps of fine grass detail so it really shows up over sharpening. I should add the original capture is already very sharp taken tripod mounted with mirror lock up at F8 with a 70-200 F2.8LIS.
Method 2. Open image in CS3 and Sized to 600DPI in CS3 [so it was approx 6.9x4.7] without resampling. Apply Photokit Output Sharpener at 480 Glossy Fine. Send to the Plugin and let it upsize using Bilinear. Scale photo to fit the paper in the plugin. This is the approach talked about by 'Weasel' in the FAQ discussion on sharpening workflow test revisted on the Wiki.
Result in print - Much better than option 1 - the over sharpening is obviously gone and the print looks smoother. Everything is still sharp, but without halos and looks VERY nice.
Conclusion - from this very limited test it would appear to my eyes that its far better to send native pixels to the IPFX100 printer at 600DPI and let it interpolate and scale to fit the paper in the plugin than it is to uprez the image in photoshop and try and sharpen it appropriatley. Now it may well be that my sharpening skills are not the best and others could produce a better result with uprezing - no question.
Going to try a 3rd option tonight, which is the method reccomended by John Hollenberg on the Wiki - as follows:
John Hollenberg initially confirmed Marc's findings, but after viewing the Luminous Landscape Tutorial From Camera to Print went back and re-tested. He now believes that if the PPI will be between 180 and 480, no resampling should be done in Photoshop, and the file should be set to 600 PPI (without resampling) and then re-sampled in the Photoshop Export plugin using Bilinear. Detailed steps follow, starting with a duplicate of master file:
1. Capture sharpen with EasyS from Outback Photo (I usually use Low with Halo Control, and may set the opacity of the sharpening layer to 50-90% depending on how much sharpening has been done by the raw converter)
2. Flatten the image
3. Resize to my desired output size without resample (let the PPI float)
4 .Output sharpen with Photokit Sharpener for the proper media and using the proper PPI (e.g., Inkjet glossy 180 PPI)
5. Resize to 600 PPI without resample (let the size float)
6. Print from PS Export plugin using 600 PPI, highest number of passes, unidirectional, proper media type, and resample to desired size (same as in step 3) using bilinear in the plugin. Will see how this goes tonight - but will select Bicubic instead of Bilinear in the plugin as Bicubic wasnt available in the plug in when John wrote this method.