Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: [OT] Printing Advice

Subject: [OM] Re: [OT] Printing Advice
From: "John Hermanson" <omtech@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 08:28:27 -0500
I don't know what printer you're using.  With my Epson, print quality 
improved dramatically when I unchecked 'high speed' under advanced options. 
Of course, the option should also be picked for 'best photo', or the printer 
should be set for the highest possible dpi setting.

John Hermanson
Camtech Photo Services, Inc.
21 South Lane, Huntington, NY, 11743-4714,
631-424-2121, www.zuiko.com
Olympus OM Service since 1977
<:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:>
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Willie Wonka" <alienspecimen@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 8:28 PM
Subject: [OM] Re: [OT] Printing Advice


> OK,
> Another dumb question: how do you get to the resampling image box?
> I am in the image size box and in it I see pixel dimentions and document 
> size.  I started by adjusting the size to 5X5cm, the resolution in the 
> document size box was set at 72ppi by default.
> The size of the picture originally was 8.04MB.  After this first part, the 
> pixel dimentions box tells me that my file was reduced to 58KB.  Then I go 
> and change the 72ppi to 300ppi (still at 5X5) and the file 'swells" to 
> 996KB.
> It looks like it has been resized automatically, do I still need to adjust 
> sampling?
> I did some experiments:
> Printed it at 72, 150,300 and 800 ppi (the last one was 6.92MB) and the 
> pictures looked better as I increased the resolution...I did alignment and 
> cleaning, it did not help.
> It just looks coarse, like from an older or cheap printer, you know what I 
> mean, you can see the dots...
> I also experimented with printing a 5X5 picture, which I scanned at 
> 2400X1200 on my CanoScah D1250U2F.  Looking what PS tells me it is 
> whooping 70.4MB(?), but it shows resolution of 2400 ppi and I am having 
> hard time digesting this...Originally I started telling you this, because 
> this picture was printed with outstanding results...
> If you got any ideas, let me know, I need a brake...
> Boris
>
> Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Willie Wonka wrote:
>
>>Nevermind, I found it:
>>Image/image size...
>>I adjusted it to the 5X5cm size I needed and specified 300 pixels per inch 
>>and the result was the same as before.
>>
> You can't specify both size and ppi without resampling. Unless you have
> the Resampling Image box checked (PS), typing in either size boxes or
> ppi box will simultaneously change the other.
>
> Think about it logically. If you have an image 300 pixels wide, at 300
> ppi, it can only be 1 inch wide.
>
> Generally, you are better off just specifying the image size and letting
> the ppi fall where it may. Even if the ppi is too low and the image
> needs upsampling, the printer driver will generally do this as well or
> better than the editing software, since it knows just what the printer
> needs. Just be sure to pick the highest quality option in the driver.
>
> Moose
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
> 


==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz