ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: 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



It is very simple Paul; if you scan an image or film frame at 1200 ppi
or above and do not down sample in PS or another editing program but
send it on to the printer, you will be faced with this choice.  It is
only if you DO resample downward in this case would you not be faced
with the chouce.


filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk <> wrote:
>> From: LAURIE SOLOMON
>>
>> Based on the discussion, an interesting question is raised. Since
>> 720 ppi is needed by the printer driver for a desktop printer and
>> 360 ppi for a wide format printer, is it better to send the printer
>> files with less than 320 or 720 ppi and let it upsample the image or
>> to send it files with more than 320 or 720 ppi and let the printer
>> driver downsample them - leaving aside the option of doing such
>> resampling prior to sending the file to the printer?
>
> I don't see how you'd be faced with this choice unless you had
> decided to explicitly resample before printing. In this case, it
> would make sense to choose the next highest resolution that divides
> evenly into the printer's natural resolution, to avoid aliasing.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 10/9/2003

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



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.