On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Lee H. Skinner wrote:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?art=533
Pricewatch lists vendors selling the 9.2Mpixel resolution ViewSonic VP2290b TFT display monitor starting at a bit more than $6,000 -- video card is extra.
That's 4 times a 1920x1200 image. This is an 8:5 aspect ratio.
I'd love to see some fractals on that screen!
Print on a transparency at 600dpi and light it from the back. At 10.5" by 8", that's 6300 by 4800 -- fewer colours, but more pixels. It's probably smaller than that screen though, so you might want to blow it up on a projector. Still, the equipment is likely a lot cheaper, perhaps just a little glue, a window, and remover for the glue (just in case you get tired of it). Buy The Weigh. Don't bother with resolutions above 600 dpi for images at home. A lot of advertizing contains the term "optimized DPI", and as far as I can tell, that usually means 600dpi with more levels of ink or more colours. So, by "optimized [for sales]", they mean adjusted for comparison with four colour process printing (which really can go up to 2458 dpi). (That's a lot of data in truecolour, so I wonder if there's a way to make and print 4 colour pre-dithered GIFs that won't be adjusted in the printer. There's a device called bitcmyk in GhostScript, but I hav no clue how to use it). I think that the physics of a moving print-head on an ink-jet printer keep the real DPI (as opposed to Bits Per Pixel) down to about 600 dpi. I'd hav to look at a few more detailed specification sheets to say that this always applies, but as a rule, printing at higher resolutions involves a lot of time, trouble, and space. Don't bother with resolutions above 600 dots per inch, unless you know that your printer supports it.