Campos & Davis Photos (photos@campos-davis.co.uk)
Fri, 30 Jul 1999 20:58:38 +0100
The Epsom software tells you, however this is interpolated.
Campos & Davis Photos
6 Cranbourne Road
London N10 2BT
Tel/Fax + 44 181 883 8638
email: photos@campos-davis.co.uk
WEB SITE: http://www.campos-davis.co.uk
----------
> From: Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com>
> To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
> Cc: alt-photo-process list <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
> Subject: Re: More on the limits of Grayscale
> Date: Friday, 30 July, 1999 5:50 PM
>
>
>
> On Fri, 30 Jul 1999, Nick Makris wrote:
> > So, the moral of the story is use fewer colors and fewer lines in the
above
> > formula to force the desired printer output. In the above formula
> > 130Xsquare root(130)=1482 and therefore the max printer resolution
(1440)
> > will prevail. In my reading, I have found that the numbers used for
colors
> > (130) and LPI (130) above are acceptable for many outputs. Test, Test,
> > Test!!!!!
> >
> > As with all investigation, some questions remain unanswered. In this
case,
> > I don't understand what the association between LPI (as in screened
output
> > or halftones) and that of stochastic output which supposedly has no
defined
> > lines.
> >
> > If you have any answers, comments or corrections, please post.
>
>
> Nick, you touch on, or at least evoke, what I have myself noticed --
> although my understanding to date is still at what I'll call an
> *early* stage...
>
> No matter what resolution I scan at or work in, the printer makes up its
> own "mind" -- and does NOT send me an announcement. My current printer
> (about to be augmented by inkjet) is a laser with only 4 mb of memory. I
> gather that that's the limiting factor, at least with the laser.
>
> But in any form of printer is there a way to make it reveal what
> resolution it's actually printing in?
>
> Judy
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:40:39