Output sharpner and Image Print

[Carolstrickman]

I just started using Image Print. Do I need to make any adjustments to the output sharpner when using Image Print?

[rjanowsky]

AFAIK Imageprint doesn't do any sharpening at print time. Normally I would output sharpen
for the image resolution (240/300/360). But ImagePrint resamples to 360 at the dot level.
So you can try for yourself which sharpener (240/300/360) works best for your prints.
I would assume, there're only small differences.

[Bruce Fraser]

ImagePrint doesn't resample the pixels to 360 ppi—it just passes them through a 360ppi grid when it's deciding dot placement.

I strongly recommend that you use the inkjet sharpener that corresponds to the resolution of the file you're feeding to ImagePrint.

[malland]

Bruce:

I strongly recommend that you use the inkjet sharpener that corresponds to the resolution of the file you're feeding to ImagePrint.
I have been applying the PhotoKit Sharpener 360 (glossy) Output setting for my prints on Epson Semi-Matte to 5,760 ppi files sized at 24x36mm (100% optical resolution scan) and then resizing them to 24 times that size (to 24x36 inches) in ImagePrint with good results and without any difficulties, basically because ColorByte says that IP resizes at the pixel level.

I haven't done a comparison resizing in PS and sharpening in PK at the file resolution (lack of time and laziness!). Have you made the comparison?

[Bruce Fraser]

I haven't done that test. I just got back from the UK and am a tad fried, but I'll try to look at this tomorrow. I'd be surprised if it was an improvement over the Inkjet 240, but I'll look.

[malland]

Hmm. I just noticed an error in my posting above:

ColorByte says that IP resizes at the "dither stage", not the "pixel level".

...but I guess Bruce knew what I meant.

[Bruce Fraser]

Actually, I thought that you meant that your understanding was that IP took the input pixels and upsampled them to 360ppi before doing anything else. It doesn't do that!

The only print controller I know that does actual pixel upsampling is QImage, and I believe that the reasons it does so aren't well founded.

But no matter what the print controller does to the input pixels, you can't control it in Photoshop. All you can do is to sharpen the pixels you actually have in Photoshop. Hence I always recommend using the sharpener that's desiged for the actual pixel rez in Photoshop.

[malland]

I haven't done that test. I just got back from the UK and am a tad fried, but I'll try to look at this tomorrow.

Do you think you'll have a chance to make the test? [As I indicated, I've had good results applying the PK Output sharperner at 360 glossy to a 5760 ppi scan at 100% size, roughly 24x36mm (240MB 16-bit file), and then resizing in IP to 24 times to 24x36 inches.] I guess I should test myself but won't have time to do so for a while -- it's also my natural laziness.

[Bruce Fraser]

I will do the test but it's gonna take a while—I made the mistake of updating my beta IP6 to the shipping version, not realizing that the shipping version requires a new dongle. It's on its way, and when it arrives I'll do the test.

[Jim Hayes]

For PK output sharpener---> Imageprint 6 on Epson 2200:


1) If I have a print that is lower than 360 ppi before uprezzing, should I NOT uprez but leave the print at whatever res it happens to be at? If so, is there a lower limit for this res value (i.e. if it drops below 240 ppi do I change tactics and uprez to either 240 or 360 anyway)?

2) Bruce has stated that IP6 acts differently than other RIPS and therefore, output sharpening opacity should be backed off a little. While I realize that each print is different, can you give some guidelines on how much opacity should be lowered? To 80%? More? Less?

TIA,
Jim Hayes

[malland]

Bruce:

I will do the test but it's gonna take a while—I made the mistake of updating my beta IP6 to the shipping version, not realizing that the shipping version requires a new dongle. It's on its way, and when it arrives I'll do the test.

Have you had a chance to run the test?

[Bruce Fraser]

Bruce:



Have you had a chance to run the test?

I need a little more time. No sooner had the new dongle arrived than I managed to fry both the video card AND the main logic board in my G5 by being quite uncharacteristically careless while installing a FW800 card...

I just got the repaired box back yesterday and am putting things back together!

I have a deadline that I have to meet tomorrow. I hope to get to it Thursday, but with the attendant holiday madness it'll likely be next week before I've had a chance to analyze and post the results.

[malland]

I hope to get to it Thursday, but with the attendant holiday madness it'll likely be next week before I've had a chance to analyze and post the results.

I hope this hasn't fallen between the cracks.

[malland]

Bruce:

Looks like it has. I won't be able to test myself until I get back in Bangkok, where, my printer is, in mid-May.

--Mitch/Potomac, MD

[Bruce Fraser]

No, I ran some tests but forgot to tell you.

There seems to be no point in sending more than 360ppi to ImagePrint.

Benefits of uprezzing to 360 ppi are mostly marginal at best. If you're trying to preserve very small details and are willing to do a fair bit of manual creative sharpening, it might be worth it, but it's not something I personally would do very often.