Anonymous user
Talk:Pinstripe/Printer: Difference between revisions
printer resolution: bad idea
(Can't printer drivers return the smallest dot size?) |
(printer resolution: bad idea) |
||
Line 12:
::Don't printer drivers have the facility to return the smallest dot size or resolution information that we could use to calculate the smallest dot size? [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 00:04, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
::: The TCL code, as far as I can see, is scaling 1 screen pixel to 1 pt on printout. 1pt is quite a bit larger than a smallest dot on modern printers. In general you can't tell what the smallest dot size is unless you know the exact printer model or you have a driver that knows that. Keeping track of all printer models and specs is nuts, let's ignore that. When you say "driver", a) a printer doesn't necessarily have a driver; b) it could be a generic postscript driver that knows nothing about device resolution; c) the printer might not be anywhere near your computer: what about network printers that expose only an http upload interface, for example? And, "printer resolution" is ill defined to begin with. Some printers boast say 2400 dpi resolution, but that's only when printing raster images with some clever halftoning trick, while the true resolution for a black dot may be only 600dpi. An inkjet printer has a fixed nozzle movement resolution, but each dot made by the nozzle depends highly on the ink and paper quality, which can be a much bigger smear. If your printer is one of those ancient analog x-y plotter, its resolution may be solely determined by how worn out its stylus tip is, no driver can help you with ''that''.
::: As I said before, in modern printers, you generally don't (and can't) worry about resolution as long as it's good enough. I'm not sure what kind of printer you had in mind with this task, but have the feeling that the task is not really thought through. Which leads to my other question: how is this task not a draft? --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 02:07, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
| |||