graphics sizer - NAC (almost)

[Brett Dikeman]

I was speaking of photo printing services; their imagers don't have  
as much resolution flexibility, and often if it is a "funky"  
resolution, you don't get ideal results.

Inkjets are often more flexible in their 'native' resolutions, the  
ink bleeds a bit, etc.  Also makes them much more forgiving of  
'jaggies'.  Too bad the inkjet industry has yet to produce a printer  
that doesn't exhibit a color cast, fade after a few years, or have  
ink that costs less than GOLD by weight.

Brett

On Sep 20, 2006, at 8:06 AM, Taka Mizutani wrote:

> I never had a problem with selecting "maximum quality" when  
> printing photos,
> rather than specifying a particular resolution.

>
> On 9/19/06, Brett Dikeman <quattro at frank.mercea.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Most photo services don't recommend trying to print anything below
>> 150DPI, as jaggies appear.  It is generally a good idea to make
>> anything you want to print either 300 or 600 DPI, or some even DPI,
>> as the printers usually have a kind of half-assed down-rez algorithm
>> designed for speed, not quality.  On larger prints, you should also
>> watch to not over-sharpen images.  What looks like a nice  tack-sharp
>> image on a monitor will look like hell on a print unless viewed from
>> beyond-arms-length.