Path: csiph.com!xmission!news.alt.net From: "James Wilkinson Sword" Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.cellular-phone-tech Subject: Re: Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2017 21:55:25 +0100 Organization: ~ Lines: 58 Message-ID: References: <7699542da7f01f1304183cf9c297a669@dizum.com> <2017040913334010404-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> <2017041013055897942-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> <100420171813347206%nospam@nospam.invalid> <100420171849497710%nospam@nospam.invalid> <100420172009002755%nospam@nospam.invalid> <2017041114434712366-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> <2017041121411958780-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> <2017041513490814915-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Opera Mail/1.0 (Win32) Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.advocacy:408574 comp.sys.mac.system:104432 alt.comp.os.windows-10:39567 alt.cellular-phone-tech:977 On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 21:49:08 +0100, wrote: > On 2017-04-15 18:48:14 +0000, "James Wilkinson Sword" > said: > >> On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 05:41:19 +0100, wrote: >> >>> On 2017-04-12 03:44:10 +0000, Mark Lloyd said: >>> >>>> On 04/11/2017 04:43 PM, Savageduck wrote: >>>> >>>> [snip] >>>> >>>>> For many good photo printers you will usually find 6 or more inks. My >>>>> Epson uses 8 UltraChrome K3 inks; Photo Black, Light Black, Light Light >>>>> Black, Yellow, Vivid Magenta, Vivid Light Magenta, Cyan, Light Cyan, and >>>>> when using matte paper Photo Black is exchanged for Matte Black. The >>>>> newer photo printers user 10 tanks. >>>> >>>> Is light black like dark white? >>> >>> Perhaps the "Light Light Black" would be closer to that description, >>> but I have never made a print isolated to that ink, so who knows. I >>> have never thought of it as a "dark white". However, printing a >>> graduated grey scale using the three blacks; Black, Light Black, and >>> Light Light Black produces a smoother grad, and gives better shadow to >>> light transitions, especially with toning in B&W prints. >>> >>> That idea can be seen in this shot: >>> >> >> I just printed that on photo paper at max quality (it took 5 minutes) >> with 4 inks. It looks perfect (well as good as the image on the >> screen). Either it's jpeg compressed too much, or I can see artefacts >> from your CCD. If you look for example in the top left corner, you can >> clearly see where the shades of grey change. If you zoom in, it looks >> like JPEG artefacts (blockyness). > > You might have noted that image is a resized, 666KB 1476 x 980 JPEG > intended for the purpose of illustrating a gradient on screen, not for > the production of a print. It doesn't illustrate it very well, as it's low quality. > So whatever you printed was hardly at "max > quality" regardless of the number of inks used, It certainly was, the printer was set to the highest setting of 5. > or the time it took > your printer to grind out a print. I would never use that particular > file for printing, and I was not about to post a link to a 73MB 4288 x > 2848 PSD which is what I have printed from. So why not link to something that's a decent test? I've got broadband you know, I can download a large image.... -- Why isn't there mouse-flavored cat food?