[comp.sys.next] the NeXT printer

chari@juniper.uucp (Christopher Michael Whatley) (10/20/88)

Ok, lets get this printer thing straight...

It is a 400dpi laser based on a standard Canon engine. It is completely dumb
save a single VLSI that handles the bit-blasting (~1.5mbit/sec in 300dpi
draft and 4mbit/sec in 400dpi best mode). The display postscript that drives
the display also generates the raster for the printer.

The fact that the screen is 94dpi and that the printer is 300 or 400 dpi
is totally inconsequential. Postscript does not care. Postscript is totally
resolution independent. As long as the interpreter knows the resolution of
the output medium, the output is scaled correctly.

So from now on lets talk about important things like....

How can we scan in the latest nude pictures of Brigitte Nielsen. Really,
what did they use to scan in all those nice pictures I saw on the TV spot?

Chris

-- 
$---------------$--------------------------------$-------------------------$
| Chris Whatley | mail chari@juniper.uucp        | "Ever seen the chicken  |
| 512/453-4238  |      chari@killer.dallas.tx.us |  walk?"  -Jeffrey       |
$---------------$--------------------------------$-------------------------$

casseres@Apple.COM (David Casseres) (10/26/88)

In article <5696@juniper.uucp> chari@juniper.UUCP (Christopher Michael Whatley) writes:
>Ok, lets get this printer thing straight...

>The fact that the screen is 94dpi and that the printer is 300 or 400 dpi
>is totally inconsequential. Postscript does not care. Postscript is totally
>resolution independent. As long as the interpreter knows the resolution of
>the output medium, the output is scaled correctly.
>
>So from now on lets talk about important things like....
>
>How can we scan in the latest nude pictures of Brigitte Nielsen. Really,
>what did they use to scan in all those nice pictures I saw on the TV spot?

PostScript is resolution independent but nude pictures of Brigitte Nielsen
are not -- not if they're scanned in, anyway.  If a scanned image looks
good on the 94 dpi screen, it's because it was scanned at some multiple
of 94 dpi, and will therefore look funky when printed at 300 or 400 dpi.
And vice versa.  I wish people would quit giving PostScript credit for
solving this problem, which is in fact unsolved.  PostScript is nice but
it doesn't turn lead into gold, prove Fermat's last theorem, or make
bitmaps resolution independent.

David Casseres