Re: Resolution and banding

[Kennedy McEwen <rkm@kennedym.demon.co.uk>]

In article <addnhf+306r@eGroups.com>, igorw2001 <iwesdorp@chello.nl> 
writes
>> >Also, in the 2 plus years that I have been on this and other
>printer lists, I >have never heard of 'banding' for odd input
>resolutions.
>
>
>This is where I got it:
>
>1.http://home.att.net/~arwomack01/#printbanding : read his second
>cause.
>
>2.http://www.lyson.com/includes/frames.html: Go "technical",
>then "Tips", read point 2 about how to get "optimum print quality"
>(OK, he doesn't mention banding, but he suggest that you get the best
>quality when  you "prepare your file at a resolution, which is an
>exact fraction of the print resolution")
>
I have checked your references and can tell you that in both cases it is 
**OLD** advice and is no longer relevant with drivers fro the past 2-3 
years which use the stochastic dither approach.  In fact, I doubt that 
it ever was relevant for banding as such, although at one time it was 
certainly able to produce some image artefacts.
-- 
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers
-
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.