Hello all
I have asked this before, but somehow I keep seeming to circle back, it’s never been completely resolved in my mind. Was wondering what other users advice is…..
My understanding is QTR will always expect/demand files to be at 720ppi (because ‘finest details’ is turned on in the background). If it receives files that are not 720ppi, then it (QTR) will add the pixels (resample the file) to get it to 720ppi.
If that is the case, then it seem to me preferable to resample the file in Photoshop before sending to QTR, because at least then I can choose the algorithm used for the upsizing (Preserve Details 2.0 or Bicubic Smoother usually).
But the advice that I have received previously, if my memory is correct, is to not bother about setting the ppi to 720 but just send the file as is and let QTR handle the resampling? Is this still the current advice?
Thanks!
1 Like
Hi Rachel and Jon
As per my question above, what is the current advice from IJM regarding resampling (up or down) files before sending to QTR? Is it better to add/subtract pixels in Photoshop or to just send the file as is?
Thanks
Neil
Hi Neil,
Great question! I am sorry I missed it in your original enquiry. It sounds like you’re diving into the details of print resolution, and that can make a difference in the final output.
When the QTR software prints at 2880 uni-directional, it’s laying down ink at a very high density—2880 dots per inch. This high dot density, combined with our Piezography Pro inks and .quad files, creates a stunningly sharp image. It becomes very difficult to see individual pixels, even when the original file is at a lower resolution such as with iPhone photos at 100 ppi. They print surprisingly well. This is because the printer’s high dot density with so many overlapping ink shades helps fill in the gaps and smooth things out, making a low-resolution image appear better than you might expect.
Your question about resampling is a great one. When you resample an image up, you’re essentially adding new pixels to the file. The quality of these new pixels depends entirely on the software’s algorithm. Tools like Gigapixel use very sophisticated algorithms to guess what those new pixels should look like. You can fine-tune these settings to get the best possible result - and you can do side by side print comparisons to find your fav settings. However these algorithms are often dependent on the the type of image file you are supplying.
So, what should you do? My recommendation is to test it out. Print your original files at their native resolution first. Then, try resampling them with a tool like Gigapixel and print those versions too. Compare the prints side-by-side to see if resampling is adding to or subtracting from the final print quality in your opinion.
Generally, we never recommend reducing the resolution of an image, and we believe there’s no such thing as too much optical resolution—the resolution of the original image before any resampling. Piezography print quality is superior based on the many overlapping curves of ink produced by our .quad files. What is considered best practices on EPSON driven prints often does not apply to Piezography driven prints.
If you have any more questions as you run these tests, feel free to ask.
Rachel
IJM-TechSupport