Hi Laurie,
> Kennedy McEwan published the 'proof' and Epson also state the facts in one
> of their technical support documents -
> . This says quite
> clearly that the large-format printers resample to 360 ppi
Actually, it does not say that. It says 360 DPI...NOT "ppi"...so I'm not
clear that this is exactly what they are talking about, and if it is, they
should have said PPI, as you did. Here is the quote:
"All Epson large format printers use 360dpi as the input resolution (this is
the resolution data is rasterized at), and therefore when printing from
Photoshop, the maximum page length you will be able to output to any Epson
Large format printer using the standard print driver would be 83.33 inches
(30,000 / 360dpi)."
So, though I can "interpret" that what was stated "may" mean that the
standard Epson print driver re-samples the input data to 360PPI, that is not
what it actually says, so I'm left wondering what, exactly, they were really
saying. I'm not saying it's true or isn't, but that the "evidence" is
flawed and certainly open to a differing interpretation...
Also, at the end of this paragraph, they have a simple arithmetic
error...they meant "41.67 inches (30,000 pixels / 720dpi)"...instead of " /
360"...but...they still are confusing DPI and PPI in this paragraph, yet
they use "300ppi" (NOTE ppi) in the first sentence of this paragraph, so
they clearly know there is a difference. This leads me to believe they may
be talking about something different than the actual input data gets
resampled to 360/720 PPI, but that the dither algorithm works at that
resolution, and has nothing to do with input data resampling.
Austin
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
