And this is why I like this list so much.  You get to learn a lot about all
sorts of things.  In this case, Kodak is imaging the digital picture onto
regular photo paper. They develop the film as usual, scan the negative at a
very high resolution, probably 4000 PPI if they can get 400 PPI for
printing, and they can then mess around with the picture in software, such
as Adobe PhotoShop.  Once that is done, they image the picture onto regular
photo paper and develop the paper as usual to obtain a finished photograph.

The PPI figure they mention is the same PPI that a file would have.  When
they mention 400 pixels per inch, they mean that a regular 4X6 picture will
be 1600X2400 or 3.8 megapixels.   This will make for excellent results at
that size.  It remains to be seen what the results would be for an 8X10 or
greater.  Extrapolating the numbers one gets 200 PPI for the 8X10, with 2
inches (400 pixels) cropped on the horizontal.  Not very good.  Then again
having the picture in digital, they can use bicubic interpolation and blow
up the pixel count.  I use Genuine Fractals to do the same when I print
larger pictures.


Kind regards,

Denys. . .

Denys Beauchemin
HICOMP
(800) 323-8863  (281) 288-7438         Fax: (281) 288-7438
denys at hicomp.com                             www.hicomp.com

-----Original Message-----
From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
Rob McDougall
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:39 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: OT: Digital Cameras...

Perhaps I posed my question poorly, but I'm interested in how the printing
done at my local photo-mat stacks up against the technologies we've
discussed.  The shop uses an (apparently) state-of-the-art Kodak digital lab
system based on a Noritsu QSS-2711 printer.

The references I found are:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/consumer/dls/index.jhtml
http://www.noritsu.com/2711.pdf

These documents quote the print resolution as 400DPI and I'm wondering
exactly what that means.

Regards,
Rob

-----Original Message-----
From: Denys Beauchemin [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:58 PM
To: 'Rob McDougall'; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: OT: Digital Cameras...

If you had a strange feeling of déjà lu (an incredibly funny pun) when you
read Wirt's excellent answer, it is because I posted something similar on 8
May of this year.  In this post I discussed color-printing techniques and
did some comparison with silver halide prints.

I had to reread the question posed by Rob a few times before trying to
respond.  I am still confused.  Whilst I know a few things about printing
digital photographs on paper, but I am totally unfamiliar with printing
digital photographs on silver halide (photo) paper.  (I have never heard of
this, but I am always keen on learning things.)

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *