Researchers print the highest possible resolution image allowed by physics... 100.000DPI !!

Researchers have devised a method for printing full-color images at an unprecedented resolution. This ultra-high-definition printing method uses tiny rods (measured in the tens of nanometers) to manipulate light at the smallest scales, resulting in the highest resolution images allowed by physics.

Researchers at Singapore's Institute of Materials Research and Engineering (IMRE), an institute of the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), have developed an innovative method of creating sharp, full-spectrum color images at 100,000 dots per inch (DPI). The method achieves this without need of ink or dye and bests the current crop of industrial inkjet and laserjet printers which are only able to offer up to 10,000 DPI. The new research also promises to outperform research-grade methods, which are able to dispense dyes for only single color images.

The researchers compare the breakthrough with lithography rather than the inking of current printers, and expect the technology to be implemented in reflective color displays, anti-counterfeiting, and high-density optical data recording.

Read more at the sources:
- gizmag.com
- upi.com

No use for Ink you say? How are they gonna rip-off the consumer without having to keep coming back for more of the material. . . charge them more for the "special" paper no doubt. Oh and planned obsolescence.

reply to post by elevenaugust


I'm not sure what the applications for this technology would be, but it doesn't sound like anything that will be found in your printer at home.

I found a third source which explains more, and which also provides a link to the paper:

Colour printing reaches its ultimate resolution

reply to post by elevenaugust

You're off by a week
EXISTING_THREAD

reply to post by hp1229


I thought I'd seen a thread on this before, and I tried to do a search on something like [100,000 dpi printer]. But I didn't find your thread, and now I see you had a typo in 100,000 so maybe that's why it didn't show up in my search?

Anyway, thanks for posting the link. This thread should be closed then I guess.