Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/02/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: Pixel resolution for 8x10 was: Re: [Leica] Reasons to use film
From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 12:30:38 -0500
References: <BF3545B6-65DC-11D8-B99F-0003938C439E@btinternet.com>

Frank Dernie wrote:

> There are some comparisons between digital and film to be found 
> surfing round www.luminous-landscape.com I find this agrees largely 
> with my experience, where it is parallel, not with any theory.

Hmmm... this seems to be relevent: 
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/und_resolution.shtml#need

It says "Lightjet5000 ... needs a file of exactly 304.8 PPI" and
"Many users, myself included, believe that a 360 ppi output file can 
produce a somewhat better print."

What I am saying ... which is exactly what is being said here in the 
luminous-landscape site you reference, is not based on theory -- there 
is no theoretical reason why 360 ppi is a good resolution for 
high-quality inkjet -- rather based on practice.

Jonathan
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from "Gerry Walden" <gwpics@aol.com> (Re: Pixel resolution for 8x10 was: Re: [Leica] Reasons to use film)
In reply to: Message from Frank Dernie <Frank.Dernie@btinternet.com> (Re: Pixel resolution for 8x10 was: Re: [Leica] Reasons to use film)