On 1/19/2012 9:09 AM, Bob Whitmire wrote:
> In the print engine it can and does. (But not anywhere else, you're correct.)
> In Print, there's a little box for Resolution. You can enter any value you
> want. An excellent article in Digital Photo Pro (immediate past issue, I
> think, maybe current) by Jeff Schewe, who is something of a sharpening guru,
> oops, Guru<g>. When using Epson printers, he recommends setting resolution at
> 720 for smaller prints (4x6, 7x10, etc.) and 360 for larger. With Canon
> printers, switch numbers to 600& 300. Sounds flaky, but damned if it doesn't
> work. I've tried it and LR does a smash job of making the prints.
>
> Conventional wisdom says you can't rez files in such a promiscuous manner,
> but LR experience says differently.
I am second to no one in admiring your printing expertise. So I believe
implicitly that the settings and results are as
you say.
On the other hand, you have made an assumption about what LR is doing. Perhaps
it is a straight uprezzing, but the
superior results suggest not. It could as easily be that they have somewhere
acquired a good RIP and incorporated it in
LR. Or, much the equivalent, perhaps they have done what Qimage does, a smart
sort of image adjustment specifically
adjusted to the printer in question that isn't quite straightforward uprezzing.
Results are what counts, though, not theory.
I was just concerned that someone might read what you said without care and
start using editor resizing to adjust their
dpis. I tried that way back when, and it either didn't helped or hurt,
depending on the image and how much resizing it
took. don't know if it has changed.
Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|