• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Paper Print Resolution
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Paper Print Resolution


  • Subject: Re: Paper Print Resolution
  • From: Robert L Krawitz <email@hidden>
  • Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 20:00:02 -0400

   Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 01:48:09 +0200
   From: "edmund ronald" <email@hidden>

   Obviously you'd be in a position to know. That it happens at high
   resolutions is plausible . Printing as a stochastic process :)

It depends upon the printer.  Bidirectional printing on the Stylus
Photo EX yields horrible quality at any resolution.  It isn't so bad
on the 870 and the like, but unidirectional still yields better
quality.  The R2400 definitely yields better quality at *all*
resolutions in bidirectional mode, at least with my tests.

Naively, one would expect unidirectional printing to yield better
quality for at least three reasons:

1) The head position only needs to be calibrated at one endpoint; as
   long as the head velocity is constant (or known), it doesn't matter
   if the printer doesn't know the head position perfectly at the
   other end.

2) If the printer can't compensate perfectly for acceleration and
   deceleration of the head, the linear dimensions of the print will
   differ close to the edges.  If the acceleration and deceleration
   rates aren't the same, bidirectional printing would cause
   misalignment.

3) The head is not in contact with the paper.  The ink has to travel a
   short distance, in non-zero time, between the head and the paper.
   In unidirectional mode, this travel distance (expressed as a
   vector) is identical for all passes; in bidirectional mode, the
   relative travel distance would be twice as great as the actual
   travel distance.

Yet bidirectional printing is actually better than unidirectional
printing on the current generation of printers.  Why?  I don't know.
Some funky schtuff Epson has come up with, I guess.

   On 4/18/07, Robert L Krawitz <email@hidden> wrote:
   >    Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 01:18:30 +0200
   >    From: "edmund ronald" <email@hidden>
   >
   >    Historically, slightly less sharp. Quite possibly this piece of
   >    advice is, like the rest of me, skightly outdated :)
   >
   > My experience has been that on newer Epson printers bidirectional
   > printing is actually *sharper* than unidirectional printing; in many
   > cases, that's even true at extremely high resolutions (5760x2880).
   >
   >    > Also, I have always used Bi-Directional printing (High Speed). I have
   >    > never ever been able to discern an iota of difference with it on or
   >    > off, although I never bothered to test this with my 4800s. This was
   >    > always the case with my other printers. I don't understand the
   >    > warning about using the High Speed setting. I am curious as to the
   >    > reasoning behind the warning.
 _______________________________________________
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

  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Paper Print Resolution
      • From: "Anthony Sanna" <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: Paper Print Resolution (From: "edmund ronald" <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Paper Print Resolution (From: Robert L Krawitz <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Paper Print Resolution (From: "edmund ronald" <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Paper Print Resolution
  • Next by Date: Connecting a SwatchBook
  • Previous by thread: Re: Paper Print Resolution
  • Next by thread: Re: Paper Print Resolution
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread