Thomas Charron wrote:

>   I think the printer is more at fault then the image at that point..

It's a sort of moire between the printer's diffusion and the image's
resolution, I think. I get it when I try to print normal size
(640x480~1600x1200) images blown up to one page.

--
David Fontaine  <dav### [at] faricynet>  ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

I don't understand this.
  AFAIK the dpi value in an image format (if the format supports it) is
just a value. It doesn't affect anything. The image will still have the same
amount of pixels and wouldn't care less about some value in its header
called "dpi".
  If you want to change that dpi value, then just open the file with a
paint program and change that dpi value. What's the problem? If that value
has some effect when printing then it may be relevant, but it's completely
irrelevant with respect to the image file itself.
  If you want more accuracy, render your image with more pixels.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

I have been printing some images recently and can give you some direction.
First, the printer resolution is going to be much higher than your monitor.
For example my 19 inch monitor is actually about 14 inches side-to-side and
is currently at a resolution of 1024 across.  This works out to about 73
pixels per inch.  My printer on the other hand prints at 720 dots per inch.
If I print an image that is fine "screen wise" it will be quite pixelly
printed full page on the printer.  In order to get printable images you have
to increase the render size.  I have gotten some images printed that are 34
inches wide by 25 inches tall without ANY pixels being apparent.  (Not on my
printer though, I go to a printing service.) The image size to make that
happen though is 10240 by 7680 (not a typo) so it is an order of 100 times
larger to make a clean printout.  You might get away with half that size
depending on the final size of the printout.

Of course that also means it takes *FOREVER* to render...


"Michael DiDonato" <did### [at] scrippsedu> wrote in message
news:3A105C74.B558AA0F@scripps.edu...
Is there a way to specify the resolution of the images created by POV-RAY?
I have created a couple of molecular graphics which look great on screen but
when they are printed, they contain jaggies even though they were
antialiazed.
Furthermore, when I open the TGA file in xv (or any other graphics program)
it says the resolution is 72dpi.  I would like this to be at least 600dpi.
Is there a way to specify this in POV-Ray?
Any help is appreciated.
Mike

--
*******************************
Michael DiDonato, PhD
The Scripps Research Institute
Department of Molecular Biology
Maildrop MB4
10550 North Torrey Pines Road
La Jolla, CA, 92037

Tel: (858) 784-9261
FAX: (858) 784-2277
*******************************

Post a reply to this message

Often, HTML code is disliked in newsgroups.
______
David McCabe
dav### [at] maccom
http://homepage.mac.com/davidmccabe/index.htm
God is good!

Post a reply to this message

In article <B63828CB.2CC9%dav### [at] maccom>, David 
<dav### [at] maccom> wrote:

> Often, HTML code is disliked in newsgroups.

Especially on these groups, where many people don't use newsreaders 
which support HTML and where the posts are kept as long as possible(HTML 
posts take more space).
However, Warp's message didn't use HTML, neither did any of the other 
messages in this thread...so what made you post this?

-- 
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/

<><

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 15 Nov 2000 15:37:24 -0500, Chris Huff wrote:
>However, Warp's message didn't use HTML, neither did any of the other 
>messages in this thread...so what made you post this?

Probably Warp's signature. :)

-- 
Ron Parker   http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
My opinions.  Mine.  Not anyone else's.

Post a reply to this message

Mine was sorry guys.
Chris Huff wrote in message ...
>In article <B63828CB.2CC9%dav### [at] maccom>, David
><dav### [at] maccom> wrote:
>
>> Often, HTML code is disliked in newsgroups.
>
>Especially on these groups, where many people don't use newsreaders
>which support HTML and where the posts are kept as long as possible(HTML
>posts take more space).
>However, Warp's message didn't use HTML, neither did any of the other
>messages in this thread...so what made you post this?
>
>--
>Christopher James Huff
>Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
>TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
>
><><

Post a reply to this message

In povray.general Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
: Probably Warp's signature. :)

  My signature called HTML?!!!
  That's the worst offence anyone has ever said to me!!!

  ;)

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> 
> In povray.general Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
> : Probably Warp's signature. :)
> 
>   My signature called HTML?!!!
>   That's the worst offence anyone has ever said to me!!!

Looks like binary code to me. It sure isn't human readable :)

-- 
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 03:41:11 -0800, Ken wrote...
> >   My signature called HTML?!!!
> >   That's the worst offence anyone has ever said to me!!!
> 
> Looks like binary code to me. It sure isn't human readable :)

So you'd have no trouble reading it then? ;)

Or don't you have the appropriate parser installed on your AI yet?

Bye for now,
     Jamie.

Post a reply to this message