• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / Printers / Epson P800 720 ppi MTF curves

Epson P800 720 ppi MTF curves

September 11, 2019 JimK 6 Comments

This is a continuation of testing that I’ve been doing on the Epson P800 printer. I’ve created a category called “Printers”, and put this post in that category. I will go back and find all the previous posts in this series and put them in the same category. If you go to the Category List (on the right in the desktop formatting), find “Printers” and click on it, you’ll see all the posts in the series.

In the last post in this series, I reported on the spreading of single-pixel-wide rows and columns of black or gray against a white background in a 720 ppi image printed by the P800 on Epson Premium Glossy Photo Paper with all the quality settings maximized including checking the “Finest Detail” box which makes the Epson driver halftone from a 720 ppi contone image. It looked like what should have been 1/720 inch wide rows and columns were closer to 1/480 if you were being generous, and wider if your tolerance for spurious ink was low.

A reader suggested doing a slanted edge MTF test on the printer to quantify any blurriness that results from the spreading. That seemed like a good idea to me. I did the test, and am reporting on the results here.

I printed out a low-contrast slanted edge target with the edge in several orientations:

  1. Vertical and horizontal edges aligned with the printer’s rows and columns, which would have to be tilted before scanning to make tham slanted.
  2. Vertical and horizontal edges that are pre-slanted, and were scanned with the paper square.

Conventional wisdom is that the edges in the first case should be sharper than the edges in the second case. I’ve always believed this, but never tested it, and this seemed like a good opportunity to do so.

A set up the printer as before:

  • Color mode
  • Epson PGPP
  • Max quality
  • Finest Detail

I scanned the edges on an Epson V850 Pro at 4800 ppi with unsharp masking on, and everything else off. I figured that Epson would know the right amount of unsharp masking for the scanner, and checked that by a method that I’ll describe at the end of this post.

The edges that lines up with the printer’s rows and columns were indeed the sharpest, but not by much. I’ll show you the results for them.

The vertical axis is the modulation transfer function, and the horizontal axis is the spatial frequency in cycles per millimeter. You can see that there’s not much contrast after about 12 or 13 cycles/mm. But you’re probably not used to thinking about print sharpness that way. In the following graph, I’ve converted the horizontal axis to cycles per the 720 ppi pixel of the printer:

 

If that’s not clear, maybe expressing the spatial frequency in terms of lines per inch (not line pairs per inch!) will help:

It’s pretty clear that there’s not a heck of a lot of contrast to be had above 360 lpi, which explains a lot about why I’ve not found that using 720 ppi mode for photographs provides much in the way of benefit over 360 ppi. But there is some, which explains why some people have decided that 720 ppi is better for their uses.

You’ve probably noticed that these MTF curves fall off much faster than the camera MTF’s you’re used to seeing. If we look at the edge profile, we can see why:

See those long tails on both sides of the steep part of the top curve above? That means that the printer is spraying black well away from the edge on the light side, and that it takes a while on the dark side for the density to build up to where it will eventually be.

About this time, you’re probably thinking, “Do those curves measure the performance of the P800 or of the V850?” That occured to me, too, so I scanned a sputtered Air Force target on a glass substrate:

The first thing to note is that the amount of unsharp masking in the scanner driver appears to be approximately correct, if slightly overdone. The second is that there is virtually no loss at 15 cycles/mm which is about 360 ppi, so we’re measuring the printer’s MTF here, not the scanner’s.

Printers

← GFX 100 self-heating read noise and EDR Epson P800 drop size →

Comments

  1. Anders Lundeby says

    September 11, 2019 at 11:53 pm

    Thanks for the test, the results are very clear.
    It occured to me after I left the comment on the last post that what I suggested was actually two things. One was the slanted edge resolution test that you did. The other is a staircase pattern visual test. Is it possible to see 1/720 inch steps, when we print a staircase pattern where each step is 1/720 inches high and say 1/90 inches long?

    Best regards,
    Anders Lundeby

    Reply
    • JimK says

      September 12, 2019 at 3:47 pm

      See this:

      https://blog.kasson.com/printers/epson-p800-graphics-at-720-ppi/

      Reply
  2. Ilya Zakharevich says

    September 13, 2019 at 5:49 pm

    First, thanks for all the wonderful research you are doing — and publishing here!

    > which explains why some people have decided that 720 ppi is better for their uses

    Well, honestly speaking, the graphs above ALONE cannot explain this. One also needs graphs for 360ppi printing!

    For example — up to 180 lp/in, the shown MTF is above 33% — which is not a big deal to COMPLETELY compensate on a pre-printing stage (for photographic images, where one would not have too high contrast on so high spacial frequencies). I doubt anything like this is possible with 360ppi printing.

    Reply
  3. Ilya Zakharevich says

    September 13, 2019 at 5:54 pm

    What worries me on the graphs above is the non-0 slope near 0. Mathematically, it would mean VERY slowly-delaying lobes of PSP. (This is what happens for lenses due to diffraction.)

    It is not possible with a printer, right? (One does not expect SOME ink present ARΒITRARILY far from a printed region!) I would suspect the algorithms building these curves…

    Reply
    • Brandon Dube says

      September 13, 2019 at 11:55 pm

      Slanted-edge is ill-posed to measure MTF at very low frequencies. The algorithm’s accuracy is worst at very low (RoI and filtering issues) and very high frequencies (noise).

      Reply
  4. Brandon Dube says

    September 13, 2019 at 6:05 pm

    Hi Jim,

    Thanks – the results are quite informative. It appears that Epson has designed this printer very well in this regard. Its MTF drops to zero just about exactly at the spatial frequency that corresponds to the “sampling” (plotting) frequency and is almost linear inside the passband. It is in that sense, quite the same as if someone had a “Q=2” diffraction limited imaging system.

    I do wonder – if they made a 1440ppi model or higher, at what point does the paper limit the result, and at what point is finer plotting invisible to the eye. I suppose we could break out SQF and all that to see how close to perfect this printer is under some viewing assumptions.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.