Filmscanners mailing list archive (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Pixels per inch vs DPI
Chapter 14 of Professional Photoshop - "Resolving the Resolution Issue":
printed dots per inch consist of grids of spots per dot - of differing
picoliter sizes depending on the printer.
Apples and oranges?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Geraghty" <email@example.com>
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Pixels per inch vs DPI
| "SKID Photography" <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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.