#Printing Question!?
5 messages in this thread
A while back someone said that to print an image to an 8.5"x11" page that one
should render the image at 3000×2400, but someone else, I think it was Pyros,
mentioned that one should render them at 2700×2400 to aspect ratio 1. What is
the difference and advantage of using one instead of the other? By the way I'm
asking because I want to print an image to a Cannon Fiery, or IRIS. Thanks for
any comments….
Rachid
Rachid:
Yes, you quoted me properly, but the line you missed was "pixel for pixel"
output to the printer. 2,700 x 2,400 aspect ratio of 1 is the proper size for
the 300DPI Mitsubishi Dye Sub printer at 8-1/2 x 11.
Determine the size by the printer's capabilities.
Greg Pyros
Rachid,
You always want to render at an aspect of 1 when the final output will
be a print or slide, etc.. The width x height ratio should be
determind by the ratio of the final medium. If you want your image to
completely fill a slide, the ratio is 3W x 2H, i.e., the actual
pixels would depend on the degree of resolution you wanted. 3000W x
2000H will obviously be sharper than 1800W x 1200H, and would be more
appropriate for a larger final medium. Much of the standard paper
sizes are closer to a 4W x 3H ratio, similar to a computer screen. In
these cases, you might want to render at 3200W x 2400H, or 2048W x
1536H, or 2000W x 1500H. These images will usually be rotated 90%
when printing, or you would put the printer into landscape mode. If
you *want* an image to be in portrait mode, where the final output
will be higher than it is wide, just reverse your height and width
ratios. For the most exact output, measure your final desired
printing area before rendering, and set up your ratios accordingly.
BTW, you don't *have* to render at a 3W x 2H ratio for slides if that
isn't the ratio you want for enlargements, etc.; if you want a final
enlargement of 10"W x 8"H from a slide, you could render at, say,
2000W x 1600H. Your slide would then have a black area down each
side, but this would be ignored for the enlargement.
John
Very nice summation, John. It's about time someone had an accurate and concise
wxplanation for us. I've been doing slide output for awhile now and you're the
first person I've read that defined the process as nicely as this.
Thanks
John,
Thanks for the help, I never thought getting a good print required so much math
🙂 Anyway thanks again I going to be doing some experimenting with printing
because I need to prepare some hard copies of architectural views.
RAchid