Can .jpg's print fancy text as sharp as a layered pdf?

[Yroc]

I was at an industry event today and got in an argument with another printer about the clarity and quality of a .jpeg vs. layered pdf. We are using software that is rendering the files down to a .jpg and I am noticing that the text is never as clear as when I print directly from a .pdf. I have done samples printing from the pdf and then flattening the file and printing it and it looks worse, but is there any way that I'm missing something here? .jpgs are simple and WYSIWYG, which is nice, but I want to print the best possible print. I'm printing on a Xerox 1000 BTW.

 

[chrisg42]

In simple terms: text in a PDF is a vector element so will always output at the maximum resolution of the output device; text in a .jpg will output at the resolution of the image. So the quality of the .jpg text output is dependent on image resolution. In theory if the .jpg is high enough resolution then the quality should match. In practice, other factors come into play: whether anti-aliasing has been applied when the text is "rendered" as a .jpg; the degree of JPEG compression applied.

 

[Yroc]

That was his argument, but I have not been able to create a .jpg that had as good of text as the same in a pdf. Usually it would be on smaller, lighter text. It seems large dark text it totally fine, or at least not noticeable.

 

[dabob]

jpgs as we all know are raster objects and are contones . . hence the transition between the letters for example 100% K and the white background will have some intermediate steps which would create "fuzziness" the lack of edge definition will add to the lack of definition compared to the vector generated type . . .