I couldn't (and probably didn't) say it better myself ;-)
Art
Rob Geraghty wrote:
> "SKID Photography" <skid@bway.net> wrote:
>
>>Are you saying that because inkjet printers employ a schoastic dithering
>>
> pattern to represent pixels that film
>
>>grain and scan pixels (samples, whatever) are equivalent in regards to the
>>
> amount of information they impart
>
>>to an inkjet printer?
>>
>
> I think Art was saying that the relationship between pixels in the file and
> dots on the page isn't clear cut because the dither pattern used by the
> printer driver is random and therefore undoes some of the regularity of the
> pixels. The print ends up looking smoother than say a monitor image because
> the printer shadings aren't constructed as rectilinear sharp edged objects
> but random spots of colour.
>
> Rob
>
>
> .
>
>
