It may be a difference in expectations then. In that case you better color some crop functions grey if the conditions make them unworkable. Takes away false expectations. I did some tests what works and what doesn't. Very little is usable with Original Size as the first goal.

When I load a Tiff image with a PS made size description of 260x173mm with Original Size to a print page of 500x500 mm it is described as 260x173mm

at 400 PPI and printed that way. Entirely correct.

Auto Cropping:

When I load the same image with Original Size to a print page of 150x150mm and Auto Cropping is on and I give the OK for fitting = cropping to the

print page I get the dimension 150x150mm at 462 PPI. No borders etc set. That isn't the correct resolution. It reduces the shortest dimension to

150mm and crops the longest dimension as far as the preview is the right information. Could be the displayed resolution isn't correct, could be that

it doesn't print correct.

When I load the same image with Original Size to a print page of 500x150mm and Auto Cropping is on and I give the OK for fitting is cropping to the

print page I get the dimension 500x150mm at 208 PPI. That isn't the correct resolution. It expands the longest image dimension of the image to the

longest dimension of the print page and crops the shortest dimension to the print page.

To me that doesn't represent a crop on the Original Size. That the logic of it suits people using Qimage based custom or fixed sizes etc is another

thing.

Test Strip cropping:

When I load a Tiff image with a PS made size description of 260x173mm with Original Size to a print page of 500x500 mm it is described as 260x173mm

at 400 PPI and printed that way. Entirely correct.  When I then hit the Test Strip button it crops to the predefined crop size and in that state it

keeps the 400 PPI. I can not select another segment of the image or reduce the crop while keeping the 400 PPI. When the print queue is cleared and

the same image is selected again it can happen that the crop is applied again while no crop action is made. A habit that is also present in the High

Precison crop functions but worse there. More or less usable in Original Size mode.

When I load the same image with Original Size to a print page of 150x150mm and let the image cover more print pages (2x2) it takes the size

260x173mm at 400 PPI according the queue information. When I hit the Test Strip button the two image dimensions crop on the 150 mm, all the sizes

displayed say 150X150mm and the resolution says 400 PPI. Looks like that is done correctly.

When I load the same image with Original Size to a print page of 500x150mm and let the image cover more print pages (2) it takes the size 260x173mm

at 400 PPI according the queue information. When I hit the Test Strip button the image fills the 500 mm and crops on the 150mm resolution, all the

sizes displayed say 500X150mm but the resolution says 400 PPI. Either the displayed sizes are wrong or the resolution and the preview isn't correct.

It could be that it prints correctly at 400 PPI and a reduced size but I have had it with trial prints meanwhile.

High Precision Crop:

When I load the same image with Original Size to a print page of 150x150mm and let the image cover more print pages (2x2) it takes the size

260x173mm at 400 PPI according the queue information. When I hit the High Precision Crop the aspect ratio of the image is used for the crop and any

variation of that size will deliver no 400 PPI in the end result. The only one that will is no crop. This function has even more the habit to stay

fixed on the image in the file. If I clear the queue and reload the image again at original size I get the crop in the preview window scissors

included but spread over 2x2 pages. It can only be cleared when I return to the Page Edit menu and clear the crop there. Looks like it lends too

much function from the action filters without telling the user

Same issues with a 500x150 print page.

-------
I wouldn't mind if you scrap the entire crop functions if Original Size is selected or when an image covers more print pages in that condition.

The Thumbnail action filter is what I will use. It seems to be the reliable and usable one for Original Size. It would be nice though to have
the mm's displayed when the crop has to be defined.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

Fred,

I would even say nobody after its true function is revealed. It does almost the same what Auto Cropping does. In general it is a duplication of the Auto Cropping function but you can reduce the crop, after it expanded to fit the page though. To get the original size resolution back means that the crop will also be smaller than the limitating print page size dimension. What I was looking for is a crop of the original size filling the limitating print page dimension optimally. Loss of some unused paper at the ends of that paper strip isn't a problem if one counts the time it takes to remove a roll on the machine and insert a sheet and go back again to the roll for the real print.

BTW. if you undo the crop (hit X) in the menu, the preview now shows a deformed image while the actual crop made is alright.

I wonder whether the High Precision Crop can be made more flexible in crop size/aspect ratio, giving good size information back at the same time. Say equal to the PS crop function + keeping the selected resolution like the PS tool does too. Allow expansion or reduction after that within the limitation of the print page. Test crops should be 1:1 to the print size one selects for the real print. The Test Strip Crop and "Reduce" can be taken out in my opinion. It probably was never used anyway as the bug hasn't been reported before while I know it existed a long time. Not only with "Original Size" but with any size choice at the start of the job that exceeds the print page size.

The Auto Cropping together with the choice Original Size doesn't do what one expects either. It makes a crop that fits the print page. Either chance the High Precision crop as suggested above or change the Auto Cropping function that it holds the original size of the image and only crops on the dimension that doesn't fit the print page. A choice of which section will be used for the crop could be a new feature.

Or make a flexible crop function possible before the page nesting stage and either save that crop for the time being or keep it more virtual if saving goes against the "unaltered image file" philosophy of Qimage. This way you can load one or more test crops on one strip or sheet while keeping the original size resolution or expand/reduce if that is your preference. Edit, I see this is already available in the thumbnail filter creation, looks very good but I can´t find a size other than pixels. MMs would be nice.

The crop functions as used in Qimage are mainly based on a fit to page function and alteration choices start after that. Exception is the High Precision Crop that isn't a very flexible tool either.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

Sorry about the eyes. My eyes are a bit exhausted too after all the trials. You fixed it but it is unlikely that I will use it in that fashion. The original size relation is lost anyway and it more or less does what Auto cropping does. In that case I better set a smaller roll width in the driver than what the roll actually is, the width equal to longest image dimension + 10 mm print margin total and say 10 cm roll length. And do the Auto cropping in Qimage. Thinking about that again and the extra work + control to do + the limitations in what part to proof it is more likely that I will do it in the linked Photoshop like I do it right now.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

Screendumps are here:

http://www.pigment-print.com/QimageCropProblem.htm



met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

Mike,

I can repeat it again and again. Borders off, Info off, metric or imperial, extrapolation off. Different images. Images spread on 6 pages or 2. Image turned once before the crop. As soon as I hit the "Test Strip: crop and reduce" the image fills the total (small strip, horizontal or vertical) print page and whether I change the dimensions of the crop manually or not I get the same outcome but at different scales.  One dimension is always compressed.

If I use the High Definition crop the aspect ratio of the crop is fixed and I only get pixel numbers as a guide so keeping original size and getting a strip is near impossible. If I use Auto cropping the image is no longer at the original size resolution in the crop. Both methods at least work without a squeezed outcome.

Whether I do something wrong  is one aspect but the previews are not representing the print and an aspect ratio change on a total image is not normal in Qimage.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

There is a way to do an aspect ratio change in Qimage but I do not think it was ever intended that way.

With a paper roll on the printer I select a usable print page size of 650x90 mm to print a proof strip of a 650x500 mm image. First I loaded that image at original size. I get the message to shrink the image so it can fit the page or print it on more pages. I select Yes to print on more pages. Then I go to the Full Page Editor and select Test Strip: crop and reduce. The preview in that menu then shows the scissors and the cropped part 650x90 mm. No deformation visible in that preview and no deformation visible in the general preview. I print either to a printer or to file and I get a 650x90 image where the 500 image dimension is resampled to 90mm so not cropped as shown in the preview, the 650mm dimension is untouched.

To avoid it I use Photoshop for a working print crop. This is an old issue that I never reported, maybe something can be done about it as it would be faster to have the Test Strip feature working in the conditions I sketched.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

If you intend to print from Photoshop CS4 and even more when you make your own printer profiles you should take notice of several color management issues that plague Adobe-Apple systems right now. In particular with recent Epson drivers but it possibly is more widespread and though some workarounds exist it isn't sure they work correctly in all cases. If you get into that misery you certainly will miss Qimage.

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?s=c8af9f74c6769b83fe88159fcffb863f&showforum=45



met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

That first line is in contradiction with the message you started the thread with:
>>You cannot automate this in PS as the stretcher bars are a fixed size yet the images vary. Its very time consuming by hand in PS.<<
You could have learned something since.

On a Gallery Wrap (the one where actual image content is stretched on the depth of the frame, so lost at the front) the automation in PS is limited as you have to add a calculation up front for one dimension (sum of frame width+2xdepth+tolerance) at least, after that it is pushing the button but little has to be computed in that case. The other wraps including the Mirror Wrap can be automated in PS with variables for the frame size (image aspect ratio kept or not) and the frame depth. I have done the job so I know it can be automated.

ImagePrint, Ergosoft Studioprint and several other RIPs are not meant for the sign market yet do not have a canvas wrap feature. There are however a lot of sgn companies doing the canvas thing with (Eco)solvent printers, in the category cheap and fast. I believe there's one RIP with a canvas wrap feature.

Pity that GF's main function is a repeat of what Qimage does perfectly already. When I have a canvas wrap ready it is loaded to Qimage for printing and Qimage will do the upsampling to the printer's native resolution. The PS actions do no resampling when the image aspect ratio isn't changed. In few (and not desirable) cases where the resolution drops below 20 PPI in the canvas wrap size a resampling is needed to let the actions work correctly.

Your opinions on esthetics, ethics, marketshare, etc are nice, we all have opinions but do not express them so explicit.



met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions for Photoshop
http://www.pigment-print.com/dinklacanvaswraps/index.html

The actions I wrote go up to 2" stretcher bar depth and near 20 feet lengths. With a choice of mirrored, extruded, deflected, colored, patterned + blurs or another filter if that is your choice. Including lines printed to control the centering and tension from the back of the frame. The deflection method is popular, it is more or less what you describe.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions for Photoshop
http://www.pigment-print.com/dinklacanvaswraps/index.html

Mike,

The thread after that feature request didn't leave much room for confusion though. I could add the messages here but for me it is a passed station.

I followed up an advice in that thread to make PS actions instead of asking for that feature in Qimage. They were not as easy to make as the advice suggested or maybe I wanted to make it easier for the user and added too many features at the same time. They work fine however.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions for Photoshop
http://www.pigment-print.com/dinklacanvaswraps/index.html

Mike,

Former Qimage listL:

>>
Mon Aug 14, 2006 5:58 pm

Feature request

I'm looking for a method that would extend the image with a
border around it that has some relation to the image itself.
It would be a convenient way to print canvas and get the edges
in harmony with the image at the front after the canvas is
nailed on the frame. What I was thinking off is stretching the
contour pixels say an inch beyond the image size chosen. A bit
blurred would be nice too. Another method would be to mirror
the image at four sides and crop at one inch but I think the
first method would look better. Could that be an additional
border choice of Qimage ? I'm sure this can be done one way or
another with image editors but it suits a professional print
program too in my opinion.

Ernst
--

--
Ernst Dinkla


www.pigment-print.com
( unvollendet )
<<

I know you normally give a low rating to my requests. I think it is not because they are so obscure that nobody would need them, but just a personal thing. Which is something I have learned to live with.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions for Photoshop
http://www.pigment-print.com/dinklacanvaswraps/index.html

Whether it is vital for Qimage is something Mike has to decide but it is absent in many RIPs as well.

Original image sizes will dictate the aspect ratio of the stretcher bar aspect ratio with any choice of canvas wrap method. A complex relation exists for the Gallery Wrap as it has to be made of straight image content only and the stretcher bar depth plays a role there too. A 1:1 relation exists for the Mirror wraps etc. If you want to use standard stretcher bar sizes then sometimes a compromise will be needed: a deformation of the image aspect ratio or a crop. The aspect ratio change is not yet possible in Qimage. Then there is the usual canvas shrinkage in the roll length that has to be compensated. I have to say that Photoshop can handle all that and it can be automated with the actions too.



met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions for Photoshop
http://www.pigment-print.com/dinklacanvaswraps/index.html

It has been requested by me some years ago. Mike didn't think it should be part of Qimage. So I wrote several Photoshop actions to do the different job.



met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions for Photoshop
http://www.pigment-print.com/dinklacanvaswraps/index.html

Modern network cards etc recognise both types of network cables so I don't think you need a cross link cable to make that work.
I did have a direct cable from a PC's printer dedicated network card to a plain Z3100 and it worked well. Usually the printer's address has to be set manually. Right now there's a fast switch between two systems and the two Z models and it works too.

The problem is at the other end in my opinion.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

I find that Qimage relation unlikely. There are some references to 71: errors in the Z3100 Service manual and they are memory related but it doesn't mention 71:03 specifically. If HP suggests to erase the harddisc it is not a Qimage issue.

Nevertheless I would recommend to load 8 bit Tiffs without layers etc. As simple as possible to keep the load low.  The Prophoto profile shouldn't be a problem. Color management in Qimage and CM off on the driver. Most likely you have done that already. If the settings do not hold in the driver (fall back to the default) then make a printing shortcut in the driver and use that. The settings stick better then. You could check the network connection, use another cable, make a direct network connection from system to printer, use the UDB connection etc. If that doesn't do it the problem is at the other end .......



met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/