Digital BW, The Print

Paul did you select "finest detail" in ABW to take advantage of the 720ppi
resolution?

Mike


On 12/11/06, Paul Roark <paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
>   I did a quick comparison of the 2400 in ABW mode against the 2200 with
> the
> 4K+ and IJC. I used a 720 ppi, 1 inch high version of my Rainbow Falls
> shot. It has smooth (moving water) highlights and sharp dark rocks. I just
> used ABW at "neutral" and "normal" darkness, which seemed to generally
> match
> the 2200 image, but I did not do a detailed comparison of the relative
> profiles. The 2400 did well in the smooth highlights (of course there are
> color dots there, but I can't see them in the real print), but the dark
> rocks with ABW mode show an amazing loss of fine detail compared to the
> 2200
> and IJC. I can see the difference at normal viewing distance. I don't
> think I would have noticed the lower performance in an actual print that
> was
> not compared side-by-side, but my very initial results tend to confirm
> Tyler's observations. I confess I'm surprised at the degree of difference.
>
> I might add that both prints, of course, show a tremendous loss of
> information compared to the original file when viewed with a loupe or a
> high-resolution scan. It makes me wonder how much more might be achievable
> with even better equipment. I recall the old arguments about how much
> detail the eye can see. Some tests suggest that we can only "see"
> resolutions up to about 5 line pairs per millimeter at normal viewing
> distance. On the other hand, some have claimed that we can "detect" edge
> sharpness up to the equivalent of from 30 to 100 lp/mm. Perhaps there is
> more room for improvement in our equipment than we think.
>
> Paul
>
> www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>
>
> _____
>
> From: .Tyler Boley
>
> .
>
> http://tylerboley. <http://tylerboley.com/info/RGB_Quad.jpg>
> com/info/RGB_Quad.jpg
>
> these are sections about .8" high, one from the 9800 UCK3 w/ RGB
> driver and custom profile on HPR, the other a straight quad on the
> 9600, also HPR. Both at 1440, drum scanned at 2000 dpi and downsized
> to 1000dpi for posting here. 4000 dpi would have described the dots
> better and the difference would have been greater.
> The difference is obvious. Clearly there is photographic information
> in the file that the RGB driver operating normally is incapable of
> describing on paper. .
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> 
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]