What is the optimal number of dpi/inch or dpi/cm to work and to plot a 3m x 0.8m paper /photo paper/ orapaper , RGB or CMYK, are there plotters optimizeds to plot from RGB better CMYK ?
THANKS !!!
Viktorik wrote:
What is the optimal number of dpi/inch or dpi/cm to work and to plot a 3m x 0.8m paper /photo paper/ orapaper , RGB or CMYK, are there plotters optimizeds to plot from RGB better CMYK ?
THANKS !!!
I'm an old timer to me the term plotter describes a device the use color pens like magic markers to produce plots using vector graphic. DPI is meaningless the plot size is changeable. Its all math all the need to be set is the scaling factor.
Large Images do not need to have high resloution because of viewing distance. Human vision is not high resolution at distance have you ever see a billboard poster up close. They are norally view at great distances and often its not even posible to get neay them.
Your 3M by less than 1M image is not that huge like billboard posters still to take in its 3m width a viewer will still a considable distance to be able to view the full 3M width without moving their eyes to scan the image. So if your image is being printed not plotted a resolution like 100DPI will easily do.
ok, yhanks to all , I am talking about my works at faculty of architecture , lines 0.2/ 0.5/08/1.0/2.0mm plans, sections exported from vector cad programs to pdf 300dpi/inch, and inserted into photoshop, an renders ofcourse , first 2.4m x 0.8m
http://www.flickr.com/photos/70715237@N05/6944413949/in/set-7215762949 0381319/
second
3m s 0.8m
http://www.flickr.com/photos/70715237@N05/6798307776/sizes/l/in/set-72 157629490381319/
I think people when look at them use both general look and near moving like scaner
A couple of very rough rules of thumb, to back up what the others have said...
1. Anticipate a more or less normal shaped print is going to be viewed from no closer than about the distance of the diagonal measurement of the print.
2. For prints to be scrutinized very closely (possibly under magnification) use 600 or more ppi, for "normal" prints up to about 8 x 10 enlargements (or maybe 11 x 17) 300 ppi, and for big prints 150 ppi. Very rough but you get the idea.
-Noel
RikRamsay14 wrote:
At that size for full colour work, you can get away with 100dpi
JJMACK wrote:
So if your image is being printed not plotted a resolution like 100DPI will easily do.
Noel Carboni wrote:
...and for big prints 150 ppi.
There is no 'optimal' when it comes to printing large format as it depends on the final requirements - viewing distance, level of scrutiny, paper type, color and what you want to achieve. You have been given 3 almost identical answers to this question, so I think it's been answered. No need to be higher than 150dpi for your size of print.
First decision:
The resolution of the printer in dpi:
360 / 720 / 1440 dpi / more is fantasy
That's the number of ink drops per ink per inch on the paper.
Second decision:
The resolution of raster image sources in ppi:
36 / 72 / 144 ppi
or more!
The first decision depends on the observer's viewing distance.
The second depends on the first.
This relation dpi/ppi is based on average experiences, printing by
frequency modulation (stochastic dithering) or by amplitude modu-
lation. The relation dpi/ppi=10 is a reasonable rule of thumb.
This means roughly, that we have 100 levels (in each channel) per
pixel.
What I don't understand: why are the source images - some of them
obviously vector graphics (the floor plans) - manipulated by Photoshop?
Normally, one would use assemblies by InDesign.
Best regards --Gernot Hoffmann
North America
Europe, Middle East and Africa
Asia Pacific