Xref: utzoo comp.fonts:2442 comp.periphs.printers:1143 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!wang!wdr From: wdr@wang.com (William Ricker) Newsgroups: comp.fonts,comp.periphs.printers Subject: Re: Resolution enhancement technologies Message-ID: Date: 3 May 91 17:19:36 GMT References: <91120.110204U12570@uicvm.uic.edu> <1991May2.211014.5870@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA Lines: 27 xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: >From my own experience doing 800 dpi large format (E size) laser onto >film, 1200 dpi seems a bit of overkill; existing printing inks in 1978 >tended to blur all detail below about 600dpi in any case, so that >whether your pixels were round or square, no stairstep remained along >diagonal lines; wet inks wicked together to smooth the edges >mechanically. I'd hazard a guess that even dry toner would do a similar >jaggie removal wicking when it was heated to bond to the paper, in which >case 1200 dpi of detail would not carry into the final document. In >particular, a half-tone screen probably wouldn't behave as expected. It does indeed, although I'm not sure at what resolution. The reference book on dry-toner blled and how to take advantage of it is /Digital Typography: An Introduction to Type and Compostition for Computer System Design/, Richard Rubinstein, Addison-Wesley, 0-201-17633-5. (Dick does the occasional speaking tour; if he's in your area, see him! I I rate him up there with Tufte.) --bill -- /s/ Bill Ricker wdr@wang.wang.com "The Freedom of the Press belongs to those who own one." *** Warning: This account is not authorized to express opinions. ***