P3D Re: Printer resolution (was Re: P3D Re: Lenticulars)

["Greg Wageman" <gjw@xxxxxxxxxx>]

From: Michael Kersenbrock <michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>


>This is why the alternative of printing on a dye-sub printer can give
>such good results.  With a 600dpi dye-sub, instead of 37.6ppi one can
end
>up with 600ppi.  Some dye-subs may "cheat" and have both continuous
tone
>dots as well as dithering to extend the dynamic range but the result of
>300 dpi or 150dpi would still be decent (don't know about  mine).


Continuous tone printing is obviously highly desirable for printing
lenticulars.  I believe Bob Wier's comment that sparked this discussion
mentioned using dye-sub.  I introduced the complication of inkjet
(non-continuous tone) printing, because that's what I (and millions of
others) currently have.

It should be noted that dithering is undesirable in output meant for use
under a lenticular screen, unless one has control of it *during the
interleaving process*.  This would not typically be the case where the
printer driver or the printer itself does the dithering, after the
output image is generated.

The reason it's bad is that, if the dithered dots fall into the next
band of pixels, not only won't they serve their intended purpose of
distributing the "extra" color information to adjacent pixels since they
won't be seen with their proper neighbors, they will also appear in the
wrong band causing its color to be incorrectly shifted.  This is because
the printer (or driver) is assuming that a pixel will always be seen
surrounded by its physical neighbors.  The presence of the lenticular
screen invalidates that assumption.

     -Greg W. (gjw@xxxxxxxxxx)



------------------------------