| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/19/2002 04:58:19 PM · #1 |
In learning more about DPI and printing from listening to people on the site (thanks) I was struck with wondering what the DPI was for the place I generally got prints from. I asked and was told it did not have DPI because it was a chemical printer.
Is it bad, good, if relation to digital? Does that mean I am all set and it will print as high quality as I have for a file? What does that mean as far as me cropping and printing those enlargements? |
|
|
|
07/19/2002 05:27:07 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by Agamemnon:
In learning more about DPI and printing from listening to people on the site (thanks) I was struck with wondering what the DPI was for the place I generally got prints from. I asked and was told it did not have DPI because it was a chemical printer.
Is it bad, good, if relation to digital? Does that mean I am all set and it will print as high quality as I have for a file? What does that mean as far as me cropping and printing those enlargements?
It's good :) DPI doesnt apply to the chemical printers or the die sublimation printers. You are probably getting the best print possible from your image this way.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2002 05:30:09 PM · #3 |
| Sweet... well except it makes me want to go and buy a camera with more pixels. How does this effect enlargements? |
|
|
|
07/19/2002 05:36:08 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by Agamemnon:
Sweet... well except it makes me want to go and buy a camera with more pixels. How does this effect enlargements?
I don't know how the chemical process works, but I would have to assume that more pixels is always better... especially with enlargements. The enlargement process is going to either increase the distance between each pixel, or it is going to interpolate and add pixels that it 'thinks' should be there... at any rate, there will be image degradation.
I have been exploring the printing possibilities with my 5mp camera this week. If I use a full framed (not cropped) 5 megapixel image from my camera, I can print a 9x12 photo quality print at approximately 220 dpi. I used a 9x12 print of my current challenge submission in our local camera club competition on Wednesday night and got an honorable mention and lots of comments on the print quality.
I use a Hewlett Packard 1220c printer. This model prints the same quality as the 960 and 940 series printers, but it will take up to a 13x19 sheet of paper. I bought some of the Kodak high gloss picture paper at 11x17 and made a few prints and they all look nice so far. I am just waiting to see how they hold up over time to see if the ink fades.
|
|
|
|
07/19/2002 05:44:14 PM · #5 |
|
|
|
07/19/2002 05:47:14 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Agamemnon:
5mp... *drools*
What resolution is your olympus? |
|
|
|
07/19/2002 08:30:30 PM · #7 |
2.1 I seem to have no problems up to 8*10 with the Chemical Printer.
* This message has been edited by the author on 7/19/2002 8:30:40 PM. |
|
|
|
07/19/2002 10:39:32 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Agamemnon:
2.1 I seem to have no problems up to 8*10 with the Chemical Printer.
If by Chemical Printer you mean places that image to photo print paper, they DO have a resolution limitation. Those pixels in your file have to somehow be converted into some light striking the emulsion. Exactly HOW they do that so that the spots diffuse and don't show visible dots I don't know, but every one of those places specifies 300 dpi (at 100% of print size) in your file produces the best results. 200 is usually OK, and 100 the minimum. I've been using those services for a couple of years and been very happy with prints up to 8x10 from my Olympus 490Z (2.1MP). |
|
|
|
07/19/2002 11:03:46 PM · #9 |
I was reading about how the new photoshop 7 may embedd jpeg files with information that may make the files unreadable by some silver based printing machines such as the Fugi Frontier printers. This may be what dotphoto uses which is my primary photo sharing and printing service. I'm wondering if anyone who is using version 7 has experienced any problems with their jpeg files? Apparently they will be releasing a patch for this problem and hopefully many other stupid things about version 7. Maybe there already is a patch, I haven't looked yet.
Tim J |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/25/2025 07:28:06 PM EDT.
