Giovanni
Newbie
Posts: 6
|
 |
« on: March 14, 2011, 07:01:25 PM » |
|
Hi everybody,
my name is Giovanni. I'm a Software Engineer with a big passion for photography.
I'm currently working on on 3D photography based on lenticular technology.
I've joined this forum because I cannot find a proper answer to my "simple" question anywhere else and I assume this is the right place to come.
I have a Canon PIXMA 9500 Mark II which can print at 4800x2400 dpi with native resolution of 600 ppi.
I already know that Epson has printers which can print at a native resolution of 720 ppi.
Because of the technology I'm using for 3D pictures I'm looking for a printer which can print at a higher resolution in ppi (e.g. 1200 ppi)
I've heard there are some HP printers that can do it on special paper but I'm not sure.
Does anybody know if there exists a printer, any brand and any cost, that can print at high ppi resolution?
Thanks,
Giovanni
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ChasP505
Newbie
Posts: 46
|
|
« Reply #1 on: March 16, 2011, 10:14:57 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Chas
|
|
|
|
jeffjessee
|
|
« Reply #2 on: March 17, 2011, 10:26:14 PM » |
|
"You need to differentiate between DPI and PPI."
He did. He was VERY specific in stating what some printers could print in DPI, but stated that he needed a printer that would print 1200 PPI, which he obviously understands are two different things. So far, the highest PPI he (or I) know of is the 720 PPI of the Epson. Perhaps someone in the printing trade knows of a specialty printer that does 1200 PPI? For lenticulars, one needs to be able to print very narrow vertical slivers of several images taken from different viewpoints, so that when viewed through a plastic lenticular screen, each eye sees a different picture. The higher the PPI, the finer the vertical slivers, and hence the finer the lenticular screen that can be used, and the higher the resolution of the resulting 3D image.
Jeff J.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ChasP505
Newbie
Posts: 46
|
|
« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2011, 10:56:26 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 18, 2011, 12:04:39 AM by ChasP505 »
|
Logged
|
Chas
|
|
|
Giovanni
Newbie
Posts: 6
|
|
« Reply #4 on: March 18, 2011, 09:17:38 PM » |
|
Thanks everybody for all your answers. I'll try contact the suggested forum and if I can find some suggestion I'll post it back here.
Yes, my problem is that I actually need a very high resolution in ppi, something close to 1200ppi.
I'm kind of surprise that there is so much confusion even in the printing market.
It is sooooo difficult to have an answer to what, to me, look like an obvious problem :-(
Thanks again,
Giovanni
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ChasP505
Newbie
Posts: 46
|
|
« Reply #5 on: March 18, 2011, 10:08:29 PM » |
|
...It is sooooo difficult to have an answer to what, to me, look like an obvious problem :-( Well, the thing is, it's not an ISSUE for most of us. You have a very specialized requirement outside of most mainstream photographers' experience. The site I linked you to is frequented by a lot of industry experts. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Chas
|
|
|
Giovanni
Newbie
Posts: 6
|
|
« Reply #6 on: March 20, 2011, 12:22:24 AM » |
|
I did as you suggested and someone mentioned me the printer HP Z3200, maybe. I post it here.
"The Z3200 drivers set at Best quality + Maximum detail will ask for 1200PPI input. Whether that actually delivers 1200 PPI output quality is another question that could in theory be resolved with MTF charts of print paper resolution tests."
Giovanni
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Giovanni
Newbie
Posts: 6
|
|
« Reply #8 on: March 20, 2011, 01:25:21 PM » |
|
You are right...
If I'm not wrong, a single lens, on a 60lpi lenticular lens, is 0.42333mm wide.
Printing at 1200ppi it means being able to print 20 frames (vertical lines) per lens.
To do that, each line should be 0.02117mm wide.
This is not possible with a printer that guarantees a 0.0558mm line :-(
Giovanni
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
rayw
|
|
« Reply #9 on: March 20, 2011, 02:01:21 PM » |
|
From my limited knowledge on this, it seems that the higher resolutions are achieved by litho printing. Lower res is possible by inkjet, but they seem to use special quick drying uv sensitive inks. Printing fine lines on paper, you will get the ink bleeding into adjacent lines, this is not such a problem with printing normal photographs. I'm thinking you may get better results for smaller sizes by using a chemical photographic process (film), or possibly there are high resolution laser printers. Interesting that now they print the lenticular lenses too, using a type of varnish. Maybe http://www.articlesbase.com/hardware-articles/dell-laser-printer-1700-high-resolution-laser-printer-1826118.html may be of interest Best wishes, Ray |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 20, 2011, 02:03:22 PM by rayw »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
rayw
|
|
« Reply #10 on: March 20, 2011, 02:17:58 PM » |
|
If A4 is big enough then maybe - http://www.printerland.co.uk/OKI-C711n-P109160.aspxI've an older oki colour laser, (300dpi) they are not strictly lasers, since they use a row of LEDs. As it says 2400 dpi, then afaik, that is what you get, I don't think they can dither fixed LED's. If you are worried about colour profiling, the I used Profile prism to get mine set up. I would guess a distributor would let you run a few prints through a demo machine. Best wishes, Ray |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ernst Dinkla
|
|
« Reply #11 on: March 21, 2011, 12:39:57 PM » |
|
That part on the Z3200 1200 PPI input resolution and the disclaimer were written by me. I don't think you should take the line width specification as an absolute figure, even lenticular separations will need dithering etc to create a photographic representation. The Z3200 dots I see under the microscope have a minimum size of 40 micron diameter on RC gloss paper, not round but more pear shaped. The Z3200 knows two droplet sizes, 4 and 6 picoliter. So the average dot size will be about 50 micron which corresponds to the 0.0558 line width. The 0.010 mm for line accuracy could be an indication for dot register too. You could check Epson specifications for the recent models (9900 etc) including the line width. The wide formats have a minimum droplet size of 3.5 picoliter but usually the Epson droplet variation goes up to 3x the smallest size for the maximum so to about 11 picoliter. Use the same ratio as above for dot size. Epson claims round dots as one its image quality pros. Next the dot addressing/register has to be checked. I have no user experience whether the Best quality + Fine Detail asks for 720 or 1440 PPI input with the wide formats, I recall it does on the desktop pro models 2800? but they have a smaller droplet size and do not have to cope with large media sizes. Do trials somewhere and preferably on a dimensionally stable media like an inkjet PET foil or at least RC paper and with the separation lines parallel to the media transport direction. If it doesn't deliver then you don't have to look for another solution in other graphic printing systems, full color offset at sizes like that isn't creating more resolution but in special applications and on special media. Chromogenic laser prints, Lightjet, might offer more resolution for photographic tasks, ask Oce for the specifications. met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst New: Spectral plots of +250 inkjet papers: http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Giovanni
Newbie
Posts: 6
|
|
« Reply #12 on: March 21, 2011, 01:36:40 PM » |
|
Thanks Ernst.
your answer is very technical and it will take me a while to fully digest it.
My understaning is that the only way to figure it out for sure is finding some printing service owning some of these top quality printers and ask for a print test of one of my interlaced image for the specific resolution :-) It will require some more time... And some more money.
Giovanni
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Qimage registration expired? New lifetime licenses are only $59.99!
