2400 by 4800 dpi printer

[globe111]

when will they be available....

scanners have mooved to the 2400x4800 range, when will printers???

we have been at 2400 x 1200 dpi for a long time now.

dont get me wrong, the 2400 x1200 results are great, but there is deffinately room for improvement.

my 2 rubles.

 

[Ruthless]

Actually, there is visually no difference between the Epson 1440 setting and 2880. There is under magnification, but not to the naked eye. On a scanner though, this allows you to print larger images and still maintain quality output.

eg. a 1" by 1" image scanned at 300 dpi will look the same as one scanned at 1200 dpi. But, the 1200 dpi image will allow you to blow it up to a much larger print before you start losing quality. Granted there wasn't much to begin with. On the other hand, if you scan an 8x10 at 1200 you end up with an immense file. If you print it at 8x10 you won't see a difference in say 300 dpi than one scanned at 1200. I hope that was clear.

 

[globe111]

its clear,
BUT,

I have done photography all my life, and I realy can see the difference.

Its sort of like, shooting with a iso400 film instead of iso100 film- very noticible results- even if you dont see the grain.

there are thermal printers with 300dpi resolution that have better print output than some of the 1200by2400 I've seen.

But I was just wondering if technology will soon allow for higher resolution printers.

my 2 rubles.

 

[jwaggone]

Right. There's a big diference between the psudo-continuous tone technology of thermal or tricolored laser systems (not color laser printers but light jet systems) and the ink jet systems.

I think the root of this question is the ambiguity of the term DPI. Someone wrote a book about halftoning. They suggested thinking of scanners as dealing in Samples per inch. I think printers should be grouped with Halftones, dealing with spots per inch. Apples per inch VS. Oranges per inch.

<b><font color=red>Jwaggone</font color=red></b>