Down Sizing for printing

[KJGradwell]

Guys
I'm using 300D in RAW mode.
I'm printing at 6X4 inches (150X100mm) in photoshop.
To reduce print size I am not resampling which results in a pixel resoultion circa 520 ppi. I realize that this does not reduce file size, nor can my printer Epson R800 deal with the extra info, file handling takes longer as does printing etc.

Do I miss something ths way? Is there an quality advantage in resampling to say 300 ppi?.

I am aware that access to this forum can make us lazy. I have raed around a bit but most articles concern themselves with up sizing.

Thanks

[Jesper]

Why don't you try it for yourself - first print a photo the way you normally do (at 520 dpi), then resize it to 4 x 6 inch at 300 dpi (which means 1800 x 1200 pixels, or 2.2 megapixels) and print it. Look at the prints and see if you see any quality difference - I guess you probably will not see any significant difference. You can also measure if printing the larger photo takes more time than the smaller photo.

And please let us know your results...... :D

[KJGradwell]

Here is the result.

Original image size 2832X2128.

Cropped to 2757X 1838
Printed 150X100mm @ 467ppi
Time from pressing "print" 4 minutes 3 seconds
Time from first audible printer response 3 minutes 33 seconds.

Re-sampled to 300 ppi
Image size 1181x 1772
Equivalent times 2 minutes 57 seconds and 2 minutes 43 seconds.

No difference in print quality.

Printerer Epson R800 set to best quality (RPM) Epson glossy paper.

Kevan