A 300 ppi image scaled to .75 would yield a final resolution of 400 ppi, not 350.
When placing a PSD in Indesign, I'm pretty sure it uses the composite image unless the layers are selectively turned on or off, in which case it uses the raster image of each text layer saved in the PSD file (the same image Photoshop uses if the font isn't loaded).
If the PSD file is saved as a PDF, the text can be preserved as vector text clipping paths that cut out an appropriately colored image, not as normal text (it should then render at device resolution, but will still not trap). It will always be raster if the faux bold attribute is applied.
I think text should NOT be anti-aliased, unless the final medium is a monitor, or perhaps if the resolution is less than around 200 ppi, in which case it becomes a subjective preference (sharp edges where you can see the pixels versus blurry edges where the raster is less obvious). A monitor has a low resolution, but can effectively display any given in-gamut color within each pixel. This is where anti-aliasing usually looks good. A platesetter has a very high resolution, but when you print CMYK, there's really only 16 possible colors per pixel (2 per ink). The interpolated anti-aliased pixels end up having a screen within them that is not large enough for the tint to be resolved, and you get a distorted edge (or a blurry one if the resolution is low enough). I don't think I have ever seen a PSD file from a designer that had anti-aliasing turned off.
|
