Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 




      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: Pixels and Prints


I think you've missed my point. All images, whatever their ppi (correct this
time, Austin), printed on Epson inkjets are upsampled by the Epson driver,
unless they are already at the ppi which the driver requires (360ppi for
wideformat printers and 720ppi for desktop printers) whether you like it or
not. So  yes, upsampling may always result in some loss, but there is no way
of preventing it other than sending your image at 360 or 720 depending on
your printer. Since I understand that the printer driver uses Nearest
Neighbour resampling - the poorest upsampling method according to many - it
might be preferable to do the upsampling yourself with a better algorithm
such as Vector, Lanczos, Bicubic, etc and avoid having the printer driver do
it with NN.

People who think they are avoiding upsampling by sending their image to the
printer as it comes are deluding themselves; the printer driver will
upsample it to 360 or 720ppi, come what may.

And if sharpening is best done after everything else, including upsampling,
by doing the upsampling to 360 or 720 your self you can then do the
sharpening as the last thing. Otherwise you have to oversharpen in order to
allow for the driver upsampling lessening the effect.

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message -----
From: "KARL SCHULMEISTERS" <karlsch@verizon.net>

Upsampling always results in some loss - it might be artifacts, it might be
loss of tonal gradation.

Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.