Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There is more than dpi. I use Phaser 450 and 480X dye subs (from 90's era but that does not matter). Dye sub (let's say P480) lays transparent CMYK on the top of each other. Each of primary pixels can have 128 levels (or 255 for that matter) - now calculate how many COLOURS it can produce per EACH of its 300dpi.vjk2 wrote:
I just got a dye-sub and I love it.
I hate inkjet photoquality. Even "high quality" I can always see the little dots, and it never looks like it does on LCD. Dye-sub looks as good as LCD.
But I'm basically right in the OP, right? Also, I read there's like a "native" DPI with each dye-sub. Some will be like 314 DPI for instance.
What is the native for the CP900? 300DPI, really?
I am not an expert on half-toning, but I believe that the dithering-method could be very intricate, meaning that a simple analysis ala "16x16 bins" can be misleading.TrapperJohn wrote:
A dye sub printer is also called a continuous tone printer, in that each pixel in the 300x300 is a unique color, produced by layering translucent spots of CMYK on top of each other.
Inkjets, which are halftone rather than continuous tone, do the same by mixing dots of CMYK next to each other to simulate the desired color.
So while a 1200x1200 inkjet might seem to be higher 'resolution' than a 300x300 dye sub contone printer, the inkjet uses a 16x16 matrix of adjacent dots to do what the dye sub printer does with one dot. In that respect, the inkjet has a lower pel (printable element, the smallest unit of a unique color) density than the dye sub, even though it appears to be much higher by raw specs.
OTOH, the inkjet doesn't cost nearly as much to operate.
I do miss my Oly P400 dye sub printer - it turned out lush prints that had an almost '3D' look to them. Plus, they were waterproof and did not fade. That printer finally died, after cranking out many great prints, even if the media did get a bit expensive.
"matrix", be it 16x16 or any other given form is easy to understand when explaining colour creation using primary ones (CMYK in this case). And yes, it is far more complex than "simple" dots inside square - this is where we draw the line between good and poor RIPs. The essence of halftoning/dithering is "more primary colour pixels, the better". The "problem" (rather call it beauty) of human vision is as you say "more sensitive to luminance detail than chrominance": well, true yet if target colour cannot be rendered in continuous tone fashion, the "resulting" pixels will appear dispersed to the point where our vision see it as chroma variation.hjulenissen wrote:
I am not an expert on half-toning, but I believe that the dithering-method could be very intricate, meaning that a simple analysis ala "16x16 bins" can be misleading.TrapperJohn wrote:
A dye sub printer is also called a continuous tone printer, in that each pixel in the 300x300 is a unique color, produced by layering translucent spots of CMYK on top of each other.
Inkjets, which are halftone rather than continuous tone, do the same by mixing dots of CMYK next to each other to simulate the desired color.
So while a 1200x1200 inkjet might seem to be higher 'resolution' than a 300x300 dye sub contone printer, the inkjet uses a 16x16 matrix of adjacent dots to do what the dye sub printer does with one dot. In that respect, the inkjet has a lower pel (printable element, the smallest unit of a unique color) density than the dye sub, even though it appears to be much higher by raw specs.
OTOH, the inkjet doesn't cost nearly as much to operate.
I do miss my Oly P400 dye sub printer - it turned out lush prints that had an almost '3D' look to them. Plus, they were waterproof and did not fade. That printer finally died, after cranking out many great prints, even if the media did get a bit expensive.
Even though some area is needed to generate some colour tone, this area might not be rectangular, and knowledge about the (high-res) input image could be used to draw sharp edges more "vector-like", or gradients with little stairstepping. Throw in knowledge that our vision is more sensitive to luminance detail than chrominance detail.
-h
You are confusing Bayer filter, RGB colours and pixel colours in the final image. "Prototype" is the actual sensor, Foveon by Sigma - it's pixels in the file are "true" RGB.......vjk2 wrote:
Actually, don't digital cameras operate similarly to ink jets? Each pixel gets assigned one value and then they're all sort of dithered together to produce different tones? I believe that a CCD or CMOS sensor is essentially "flat" although there have been some prototypes I believe which tried to produce images from layers.
What I"m trying to get at is that for printing to a dye-sub, you effectively would then have to "discount" the resolution of an image from a digital camera, no? So for instance, the optimal for a 4x6 image would instead of 2 megapixels be like 6 megapixels.
I really like dye-sub a lot more than inkjet or color laser. Inkjets in particular often resulted in soggy paper, and I can always see the little dots.
Expense isn't that bad either. It costs about a quarter per 4x6 print, which is within range of an inkjet, but at better quality.
