I lost an argument on a printing forum once about native resolution.
I came away convinced that the Epson native resolution in 720dpi not
360dpi. So just about everything of any size has to be uprezzed and
any prints I have done in the past were uprezzed by the printer
software even when I thought I was doing it right. No problems though.
I think Moose at one time made the assertion that the uprezzing
engines in the printer drivers were better than the one in Photoshop,
but I could be mistaken. I understand that those pricey RIPs make
life easier except for making the money to pay for them.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Dec 10, 2006, at 5:37 AM, Bob Whitmire wrote:
>
> OK, I'm showing my profound ignorance, but this particular aspect
> of AG's
> report intrigues me. I know in Picture Window Pro I used to work
> the photo
> in its native size, and let PWP's layout function handle uprezzing. I
> thought it was just dandy. I have not been able to cause Photoshop
> to do the
> same thing. Even when I set up a Picture Package with specific
> sizes, it
> prints what I put in there at the size I put it in. I'm sure I must
> have
> missed a critical instruction. As a result, I have copies of my
> images in
> all the sizes I print them, which is a _huge_ load on my hard drive.
>
> Using an Epson 4800, Is it possible to let the printer handle
> uprezzing? Or
> do I need one of those fancy RIPs? And yes, I've used CS2 to work
> the file,
> and then imported into PWP Layout for uprezzing, but that adds
> steps and
> programs and such. I'd rather find a more efficient solution. True,
> I should
> know this stuff by now, but apparently I don't. And if you can't
> show your
> ignorant butt here, where can you show it? <wink>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|