I have used the cut marks option, in my case the width of my image is 40x30 on a 44" roll so I'm not sure what will happen when I add a border to the image to be 44"x34" ( I want 2" top left and right, and 2.25" at the bottom). I assume the cut lines defining the 44" will get cut off (which is what I want) and only the horizontal ones will remain. If that's the case this will be a good workaround, if not maybe adding a cut mark at page start/end would be a good option in the future.

I don't actually see it in that usual area which makes me wonder if epson removed it or not.

Is there an option for QImage to print page cut lines? My image is sitting in a 24x31 space.

The epson P9000 driver (at least on the mac) has a cut to exact size option when printing from a roll. Where can I find that on windows inside of QImage? I was able to get 34" high prints of a 44" roll which saved me the step of trimming after the print came out. I do believe this option wasted a little more paper but I don't mind that given how convenient it is.

I have an image that I'm printing to 15x20 and it works out to be 422ppi, would setting qimage to 720dpi have any benefit or should I set it to 360dpi and have it scale the image down before printing?

Thank you, this will be useful for my use case of single images per page.

I use the LFP accounting tool to track media and ink costs of my printer. I have noticed that applications such as lightroom will send the name of the image that i'm printing to the print que and in turn the Epson account tool will read that name to give me an indication of which image was printed.

When printing with QImage I noticed that only the name of the software printed from is being sent and then the date of the image. Is there some remedy for this?

So it's just a droplet size thing which would affect speed but total ink sprayed out is the same?

I do see what the two interpolations are doing and how some of the print sharpening is contributing to the noise which reads as extra color values to get clipped into one. I assume this would not actually show up in the print as the overall sharpening gives more of a needed perceptual punch vs micro texture at 200% screen magnification. Will do actual prints at different sizes to get a better feel for the controls.

I'm doing all those tests before printing a show later this year, and as with any new software there are a lot of questions and quirks to work out. I was using ImagePrint Rip before but $2500 is not worth it for me after having changed printers (the software is licensed per printer which is a bit much for individuals just printing their own work)

Hello, I have been playing around with what happens when an image is sent to the printer at a higher resolution than the file itself. I have done this out of lightroom before vs setting the print to 180dpi or lower. On some subjects uprezing the image produces a nicer print at close distance, so while not for everyone or for every scenario, it's something I like to do.

Here is a 50mp or so image scaled up to 360ppi for a 30x40 print and zoomed into 2x for easier viewing. (The non upscaled file wants to be 211ppi)

Both the lightroom and Qimage examples were made using the print to file feature, while the photoshop example is the original tiff which qimage is using for it's "print".
As you can see, there is a flattening of certain details in the qimage output which I would like to get rid of. The interpolation settings are set to Forge with AA set to low (I assume AA is not being used during an upscale as per info in the software interface).

Any suggestions for getting something more similar to what I'm getting out of Photoshop/Lightroom? I know there are applications purely designed for upscaling, but that's a whole other discussion.

The images start as RAW in lightroom but I export 16bit ProPhoto RGB TIFF's which are used for printing through Qimage.

Am I not losing a bit more ink if the printer is driven at its max rez? If not then I can't argue with your point 

I tried printing at 720 and in a small print, things look both smooth and sharp where they need to be, I found AA of low to work well with the small amount of scaling that is happening. Most of the files I'm testing with are close to 900ppi when at 8x10 so scaling down to 720 is not a big leap. At 360 the AA was kicking into overdrive so I will do some tests with 360ppi low AA prints as well. Sometimes sending 720ppi files to the printer when I'm printing a lot of what are in effect "contact" prints is to excessive.

I have turned off antialiasing and it makes a huge difference. It no longer looks like lens diffraction is softening the image.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KEUo3FOR01MxiKJKQCrVz55_eV7EypAu/view?usp=sharing

Would be nice to have a custom field in the future, I'm sure there must be others who would want this ability.

Will give that a try. On the print, the lightroom example actually looks the same at first glance as the Qimage example, so the over sharpened look sort of disappears, the only thing that is maintained is the surface texture and separation. Will run a few more experiments and report back.