Canon printer resolution - help!

so the new PROGRAF pro 1100 has been announced and is exciting

I'm still using PIXMA Pro 9500 Mk ii from a long time ago, but I've been having problems with it, so maybe needs to be changed.

however, at a glance of the new 1100 resolution , it's listed as 2400 x 1200 dpi

against the 9500 mk ii's 4800 x 2400 dpi

am I missing something here, or is it lower resolution than the old one ??

Mc-dublin said:

so the new PROGRAF pro 1100 has been announced and is exciting

I'm still using PIXMA Pro 9500 Mk ii from a long time ago, but I've been having problems with it, so maybe needs to be changed.

however, at a glance of the new 1100 resolution , it's listed as 2400 x 1200 dpi

against the 9500 mk ii's 4800 x 2400 dpi

am I missing something here, or is it lower resolution than the old one ??

Click to expand...

If you seek insights on this IIRC Keith Cooper has his initial video about it on his YouTube channel... That may or may not answer your concerns?

Mc-dublin said:

so the new PROGRAF pro 1100 has been announced and is exciting

I'm still using PIXMA Pro 9500 Mk ii from a long time ago, but I've been having problems with it, so maybe needs to be changed.

however, at a glance of the new 1100 resolution , it's listed as 2400 x 1200 dpi

against the 9500 mk ii's 4800 x 2400 dpi

am I missing something here, or is it lower resolution than the old one ??

Click to expand...

For photo-printing purposes, none of those is the resolution; those specifications describe how the printers simulate continuous tone / the better part of a million visually-distinct colors using only nine or ten colors of ink. This is the difference between the pictorial value, ppi = pixels per inch, and the underlying hardware behavior, dpi = dots per inch = droplets of a color of ink.

Most current-ish Canon photo printers normally print photos at 300 ppi, and can use a 'high resolution' mode that prints photos at 600 ppi. At 4800 x 2400 dpi, if you print at 300 ppi, then there's a 16 x 8 grid of addressable dot-spaces at which the printer can spray droplets of its various colors of ink. At 2400 x 1200 dpi, that drops to 8 x 4 spaces. E.g. if the pixel color is red, then the printer sprays some magenta ink and some yellow ink, and thereby simulates red. For dark red, maybe it's magenta, yellow, and gray--etc.

So then the question is: if either printer can print say 700,000 visually-distinct colors, does simulating the range of them with 10 colors ink ink plus unprinted white space using a grid of 32 spaces produce visually-less tonal smoothness or whatever you want to call it, compared with using 9 colors ink ink plus unprinted white space using a grid of 128 spaces? Although I do not know, the best-supported conclusion is that either there is no visible difference, or any visible difference is trivial.

Presumably Canon has evaluated this issue and concluded that it does not--and same for Epson and HP. If you look at the current top large photo art printers--the Epson P7570 and P9570; Canon Pro-2600, Pro-4600, and Pro-6600; and HP Z9+--all of them print 300 ppi using 2400 x 1200 dpi.

I had some vague idea that current inkjets could vary the size of the dots they produce.

Is that true or false?

If true, it adds another degree of freedom to printing a pixel.

BobKnDP said:

I had some vague idea that current inkjets could vary the size of the dots they produce.

Is that true or false?

If true, it adds another degree of freedom to printing a pixel.

Click to expand...

That's an interesting question, and I don't have a complete answer. Clearly there are current inkjets that explicitly claim to be able to vary the droplet size within the same print. I'm 94% sure the HP Z9+ is one. Clearly there are inkjets that can print different droplet sizes, but some of them may only be able to spray one droplet size in any given print, based on the quality settings, e.g., maybe smaller droplets at the best quality setting, which uses 2400x1200 dpi, and larger droplets at lower quality settings, which might use e.g. 600x600 dpi or 1200x1200 dpi. But I don't have any knowledge much less list of which current inkjets can vary the droplet size within one print.

BobKnDP said:

I had some vague idea that current inkjets could vary the size of the dots they produce.

Is that true or false?

Click to expand...

Yes, the Epson SC-P700/900 has that. From 1.5pl and up (3 steps)
Don't know about the other Epsons, but I think the 5370 might have it inherited as well.
Ruud

[snip]

Mc-dublin said:

however, at a glance of the new 1100 resolution , it's listed as 2400 x 1200 dpi

against the 9500 mk ii's 4800 x 2400 dpi

am I missing something here, or is it lower resolution than the old one ??

Click to expand...

Hi,

Short answer: don't sweat it and you are more likely to see print improvements in other aspects.

Longer answer: Maximum resolutions in specifications only give you one property of the printer and more importantly it is only one property amongst many others that are combined when interpreting an image for output.

Techie: A counter factual is that maximum resolution may not even provide the greatest photo quality. For example at that resolution only a single size dot may be available. A slightly lower resolution may be variable dot, or a printer driver developer would use the maximum resolution single dot but use it to create a variable dot using a localised matrix of dots which reduces the effective resolution.

It's like the maximum power in a car engine. It tells you something, but little about how the car puts the power on the road in the real world.

Other attributes both in the printer and in your skill set to prepare an image will have a much greater impact on the print quality.

BobKnDP said:

I had some vague idea that current inkjets could vary the size of the dots they produce.

Is that true or false?

If true, it adds another degree of freedom to printing a pixel.

Click to expand...

It is true for the majority of normal inkjets, but it has been available for a long time not just current inkjets. The range is limited though. Inkjet page marking is very far from continuous tone.

If a variable dot is not available it can be emulated using a single dot if its small enough at the cost of effective resolution.