Re: Gold resolution
Re: Gold resolution
- Subject: Re: Gold resolution
- From: email@hidden (Bruce Fraser)
- Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 18:35:15 -0800
At 8:50 AM -0300 3/8/02, Adriano Von Markendorf wrote:
Somebody hear about this article?
Bruce, I missing something?
How can I made a real "scientific" test to julge the best rule?
The only thing that's certain in all this is that anything over 2.5x
the linescreen will be discarded in the RIP.
Various people have 'proved' mathematically that anything over 1.414x
the linescreen is unnecessary. But as you've noticed, it sometimes
doesn't look as good as 2x.
Generally, when theory conflicts with the data (as in, my eyes tell
me that 1.414x linescreen looks jaggy), I trust the data over the
theory.
It's interesting -- we've used the same image in 5 editions of the
book. In three of them, we could see a difference between 2x and
1.5x, in the other two, we couldn't.
I usually use 1.5x linescreen for close subjects with soft detail.
But if I have any doubt, I go to 2x. I don't think there's an
absolute way to determine the ideal screen/pixel ratio...
Bruce
--
email@hidden
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
| References: | |
| | >Gold resolution (From: "Adriano Von Markendorf" <email@hidden>) |