Also, what is your pixel dimentions for that document?
1000 x800 300 dpi
Well, if you think about a printed document: Lets use 10" square for an example as it is simple math. 10x300 = 3000px. 9 to 12 point type looks good on paper.
So small type will not look as good on a document that is 1/3 the size. 1000/300 = 3.33in.
Type as well as other vector data is rendered in the fly. So what you see on the screen is raster but is editable as vector. Which is why the quality of the vector data changes depending on what you set for the pixel dimentions for that document.
If the text looks stairstep on its edges known as alising, then follow RKelly's advice on how to change the anti-alising. Changing that will smooth the edges of the text.
If this advice is not what you need, please post your screen so we can see what is happening.
Thanks for the help. I now understand a bit more how photoshop works and what I was perceiving as a problem was just that the psd was created in 72 dpi. My test at 300 dpi supported more zooming before it got ragged.
I am used to designing for the web in vector, but lately working with designers who a work in photoshop, Seems illogical to me. Does anyone know why graphic designers would prefer working in bitmaps instead of vectors, or is this a subject for a new discussion?