Published studies
Printing and printables
-
Study 1
- Digital study complete
- Printer validation not yet run
Printable Ink Efficiency
Measuring Coverage Reduction Across Common Worksheet Rendering Methods
How much estimated printed coverage 36 rendering methods remove from 12 kinds of computer-generated worksheet, and what each one breaks.
Main finding No single ink-saving setting performed best on every page. What a page can save depends on what covers it.
- Removing decoration was the largest lever where decoration exists.
- Page-wide fading saved little on text and line pages.
- Dot patterns never meaningfully beat a flat tint.
Planned and not yet run
-
Planned
Testing the same methods on real worksheet files. It will be listed here when it is published.
-
Designed, not run
Physical printer validation for Study 1: a weighing protocol for inkjet, ink-tank, mono laser and color laser printers is designed, not executed.
Guides built on this research
How these studies are published
- The study page is the canonical record. Its key findings, method and limitations are on the page itself, not only in the PDF.
- The PDF is generated from the study page, so the two carry the same text and version number.
- Every headline finding is tagged with the kind of evidence behind it: measured, simulated, specific to one renderer, or not yet tested.
- Data files are published with each study. A corrected study keeps its address, gets a new version number and says what changed.
The evidence labels
- Estimated coverage measured from rendered pages
- Function check measured contrast, visibility or color separation against a stated threshold
- Simulated produced by a model, not a real device
- Chromium-specific a property of one browser build
- Not tested on printers an open question for physical testing
- Physical printer test measured on a real printer; no published study has one yet