Re: dpi and line screen -- Conventional Wisdom vs Reality
Re: dpi and line screen -- Conventional Wisdom vs Reality
- Subject: Re: dpi and line screen -- Conventional Wisdom vs Reality
- From: "Pablo Roufogalis L." <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 14:53:58 -0400
Hello to all.
I guess everyone here has lots of experience with this. In mine, 1.5 is the
absolute minimum and in many images you can tell the difference between 1.5
and 2. I once read it is not 1.5 but 1.44 (square root of two) but why bother.
1.1 is not viable at all for offset printing. Too many images will look
bad, bad.
It is a good idea to go 300 dpi for 133 lpi. You'll have a safety margin
for adjustments the page designer may do.
These days LANs are fast, hard disks and memory are cheap and CPUs are
powerful. In most situations there's no need to scrimp. I'd suggest a
workflow based on 300 dpi at first-use print size for any line resolution.
You may need to repurpose the image in the future so safety margins are
desirable.
Happy 2006 to everyone.
At 12:10 PM 12/30/2005, you wrote:
Conventional wisdom says to provide twice the resolution of your line
screen for offset printing. I seem to remember reading an article
debunking that myth and promoting a resolution equal to line screen
scenario--but I can't put my hands on it.
Ing. Pablo Roufogalis L.
email@hidden
email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden