Mike Chaney's Tech Corner

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/

Tried it twice: once by specifying 650x500 print size and another by creating a 650x500mm image and adding it at "original size".  Worked properly both times.  What prints is exactly what you see on the screen: the strip at the proper size.

Are you sure there aren't any other screwy settings involved like negative margins, or other settings you didn't mention like borders, image info turned on, etc.?  Might be helpful if you posted a screen shot of the Qimage main window with all panels open once you have it ready to print.  I might notice some other feature/parameter you are using.

Mike

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/

And I can repeat it again and again with every permutation I can think of and it works every time so this is not helping: which is why I asked for the screen shot.

Mike

Screendumps are here:

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



met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

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

Fixed in v2010.103.

Thanks for the screen shots.  Those allowed me to reproduce the conditions... even if they did almost drive me blind trying to read the numbers on those scrunched screens.  :D

Mike

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/

Thanks, Mike, for your speedy fix on a problem that not many would have come across.
Fred

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/

I think you must just be doing something that is out of the scope of a test strip.  It works as it should.  When you click the test strip button, you get a page-size chunk of the original print.  You can print that test strip and lay it over the original (large) print and it'll match perfectly.  That's the definition of a test strip.  And that's what Qimage does.  When you're adding images with crop turned off, however, you can easily end up with a print that doesn't cover the entire (original) page size in one direction.  If your page is 10 inches wide but your print is only 8 inches wide due to the aspect ratio, don't expect it to work as you would expect if you ask for a 10 inch wide test strip of an 8 inch original print.  If you do that, it's garbage in, garbage out.  I'm not sure if that's what you are running into, but I get exactly what is expected as long as the page size is smaller than the original print.

Mike

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/

Ernst,
Thank you very much for your post. May I explain what I understand is the purpose and use for this feature?
As for the test strips, this is my understanding, and as I reread the help file, it came back to me.
It is really an ideal thing that Mike made, but effective if you need to check what the print will look like using a swatch of print, like you would look at a swatch of carpet. The swatch is the same pile and texture, and threads per inch as the big roll, but we want to see what it looks like.
 
Let's say that you have an R 1800 that will print 13 x 19, and you are so very concerned that you might have to waste a sheet on a mistake of settings or wrong profile, that you want to print a test.
The test that accomplishes either a test print or a test strip (a part of the print) as a print.
Let's set the print size to Fit to Page.  18.78 x 12.72
Now FPE, Cropping tab. Crop scissors on
If I click the test strip button, each click reduces the PRINT size of the test print yet keeping the ppi as if it was the 18.78 x 12.72 print size.
The current print size is 4.92 x 3.34 after I clicked that button 6 times. The ppi stayed at 185 which is what it was at a print size of 18.78 x 12.72.
Getting the point now?

Now we go further. Since the object of this example is to see what the print quality will look like without wasting a big sheet of 13 x 19, I purposely chose 6 clicks on the test strip because that made the test print size smaller than 4 x 6 and I can slip a piece of 4 x 6 paper in the printer, make a print, and what I get will be that portion of the image, 4.92 x 3.34, at the same ppi printed on 4 x 6 paper for you to see what that part would look like if it was 18.78 x 12.72.
So I now have a 4 x 6 at 185 ppi. I can judge the quality.
I can move the cropped or strip area around in that upper right cropping box to find the area of the image I want to test; a wedding dress perhaps?
That is what I use it for, and that is what works properly.
The point is that the test strip can be virtually any size depending on how many clicks on the test strip tool and you maintain the same ppi as your big print so you can see what a small portion will look like when printed large: same ppi.

Fred
 

Fred,


There's no need to explain to me that I want a proof print at 1:1. It is exactly what I asked for.

We all arrived at the conclusion that it works in the Page Edit menu if both dimensions of the print page are smaller or larger than the image is. It doesn't work however when only one dimension is. And that is what I wanted with a strip of a wide roll on a wide printer as the destination of the proof crop. I get that right now with the Thumbnail Action crop. A very good feature that spares the image data in good old Qimage fashion. Could be improved to excellent with mm feedback from the image data on cropping time.

My advice is to grey out the crop functions in the Full Page Edit window if only one dimension of the print page is short. There's no need to weed out bugs for a non functional feature. Nobody ever reported the bugs as they probably realised that it didn't bring them what they sought either. That you, Fred, had to dig in the manual for its features is another indication. Any warning there to use it only with both dimensions in the same condition?
The cropping steps are nice if you work with a desktop model and put in what normally would be wasted paper. On wide formats that isn't so handy. Try the cropping steps in some conditions that are buggy: one dimension to short and original size. Look what happens.

Putting a saw on a dead branch can help the tree and prevent accidents.

Back to business again.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

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

Mike said
Ernst said
I think this is the problem:
ED is setting his Test Strip page size FIRST - wrong sequence I think.  ???
Use the final print size for operating the Test Strip button, until the desired size is reached then set a page size to something equal to or larger than the Test Strip size.
It works that way, I tried it. I even put several Original Size images in the queue, Test Strip clicked them all 5 times, set a different crop position for each and finally reduced the page size from A4 to 100x150mm so they all fitted on that size. The original size resolution of 400ppi remained fixed  :D
Terry.

Ernst,
Please stay on point.
I went into the manual because that feature has been there for many years, and I seldom if ever even think about it because I am pretty accurate with my settings and rarely have a redo on prints, plus I don't have super expensive paper running.
I refreshed my memory because a) I'm old, and b) I never looked at it in years.
c) I was trying to help you understand the point of the feature which is maintaining the actual ppi of the large print in a test strip so you can see the real output on smaller inexpensive paper.
You seem to insist on making your own rules on how to use the Test Strip feature, and I even went so far as to install a driver from a 9800 Epson to make sure it worked the same on a 44.0 x 60 page size with a 42.0 x 58.0 inch print size on it.
It worked flawlessly.
8 clicks on the Test Strip icon gave me a dimension of 9.73 x 7.05 which then allows me to slip an 8.5 x 11 sheet in the other slot and print my test print at the same ppi as the 42. x 58 size print.
That's the best I can do.
Sorry,
Fred

Terry and Fred,

Thank you but it isn't a solution in my shop.

Terry, I don't think a wrong sequence should exist then.

If I follow Terry's path I can do one test strip print in the time I can do 5 crops with the Thumbnail Action Crop and I only have to change paper settings in the driver once + I can drop several test crops on that print page strip. More flexible, faster. less wasted paper and still a 1:1 crop.

Fred, replace yourself in what I need on a wide format with a roll loaded. I like it that you loaded the 9800 driver but the physical printer with a roll loaded is the reason that I went that path. It takes a lot of time to set a large print page in the driver for the sequence Terry gives, unload the roll on the Z3200, load a sheet, change the driver settings for that sheet and print and then return the roll physically + driver settings again to do the total print. The minimum size of a sheet on this machine is an 21 x 35 cm approx. The minimum size of a strip off a 44" roll is 112 x 7.6 cm. That is almost equal in size. Smaller rolls, less waste.

I'm quite happy with the Thumbnail Action crop now. Maybe nothing has to be changed on the Full Page Edit crop tools with you guys around for advice but for me it will become a white area on the map again. Taking too much time, too complex and bound for failure the way I work. I was simply on the wrong track. Sorry about disturbing the peace with the bug reports.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

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

Sorry about quoting myself but now I have a few more minutes to spare, this is what I did, and Like Fred, checked the Help to understand what to expect "out of the box".

I don’t normally make use of the Test Strip feature. I had tried it out when it was first introduced so I reminded myself about it by reading the Help, it seems straightforward.
My understanding is that the Test Strip tool produces a reduced print size (mm) but maintains the original print resolution. In that way, small areas of a large print can be printed on “scrap” paper at the correct print resolution.
To check it out with Original Size,
1) Edited an image in an external application so that it had an embedded 222 x148 mm at 400ppi.
2) Placed it in the queue with A4 paper, using original size.
3) Went to the FPE and clicked the Test Strip tool 5 times and moved the crop to a suitable area of the image.
4) The result was a print size of 73x49 mm at 400dpi. It did not make any difference whether crop was on or off.
5) Changed the paper size, to simulate printing on smaller paper or a scrap piece, everything remained at 400 ppi.
6) Added 3 additional copies of the image the queue and for each clicked the Test Strip button 5 times.
7) Changed the crop position for each copy of the image.
8) In all cases, the print resolution remained at 400 ppi.
9) Reduced the paper size to 130x180 (5x7), the 4 images fitted on the page, as expected.

Conclusion: the test strip feature “does what it says on the DDI box”
Terry.

You mean not in your Photo Shop ::)
I don't see it as a"wrong" sequence; ok it's not mentioned precisely in the Help but you ought to know that if you first load an image into a 150x150 page, Q will ask you the usual questions and size accordingly.
Wrong, I've already posted on how to do any number you like, and it makes no difference that I've tested on a little A4 printer rather that a big one like yours, the principals are the same!. Using Q's Test Strip feature you get a true simulation of what Qimage will do in the final print.
No worries, I've just learnt a little more about Qimage's excellent feature.  ;D
Terry.

Ernst, you can mitigate the situation in Qimage

If you set up a printer setup file for test strip size, then you can leave the roll
in place too.
Set the driver for user defined 8 x 10 page size. (Or similar to suit)
All settings in place for quality same as final print) SAVE it as a printer setup file.

In other words, go to RECALL and click on TEST strips 8 x 10.
Q will load the test strip printer setup file leaving the driver ready to
print on a user defined 8 x 10 page size. Then you click the Test Strip
button a few times until Q shows a print size of less than 8 x 10. "PRINT!"
You will only use 8" of paper.
Best wishes,

Fred

Hi,

This is how I see the requirement.

A large/expensive roll of canvas. Trying to get 'the perfect print', are the colours right, dpi, etc.

So, I want to print a two inch strip, of a selected part of an image. For example the strip may be 42inches by 2inches, and same dpi/profile etc as the final image. This needs to be orientated so that a minimum of canvas is wasted. I may want to print a number of such strips for different images, or a number of strips, at say different dpi, for the same image, the strips being printed before the final batch run. This is similar to how I did things in the darkroom.

This is what I call a 'test strip'. Is the foregoing easily achievable, hopefully by simply pressing a 'test strip' button, but if not what is the easy work around?

It my be that what you call a 'test strip' is not the same as this, but the above is what is required to be achieved.

Best wishes,

Ray

Best I can do is 2.64 x 1.93.
Fred  8)

Hey, Ray, I think I was able to make what you want.
Here's my steps:
Set the 9800 driver to roll paper banner mode.
Set user defined page size to 44.0 x 60.0
Place my image in the queue.
(Remembering that my test strip is to be 5.00 inches wide (in my test)
I click the Test strip icon until I have a size where one side is small enough to fit inside my test strip size.
Click Done.
As long as one side fits, then I click on RECALL. and bring in my printer setup for 5.00 x 44.0 inch page setup.
Highlight the small image on the preview page so it is selected, and click on Fit to Page for a print size.
Bingo! I have a strip with the same ppi as the original.
Try it! It works fine.
Fred
* Note The smallest dimension for the 9800 page size is 5.0 inches with roll paper.

Ok, then Fred, let's say a 17inch roll of canvas, and you want test strips 15inch by 2inch. The cost (in material and time) is not the same, but the method  is.

edit - this was in response to your 2.64 by 1.93. I never said it was any specific printer.

Still works fine. I swapped the sides in the Epson 9800 and made the roll width 3.5 (minimum allowed), and I have a perfect test strip of 3.27 x 15 inches at the same ppi.
Fred

Easy one.  Just set the page width to 15 inches and the page length to 2 inches in the driver.  If the driver won't allow a length that short, no problem: just use "Page Formatting", "Page Margins" and enter additional margins that create a 15 x 2 printable area so that 15 x 2 is listed above the preview page in Qimage.  Save that printer setup if you like so you can just load it in the future and get a 15 x 2 strip any time you want it.

Next just add a photo to the queue at its full size.  Let's say the full size is 15x22 and you want a 15x2 strip of that.  So just add the image at the 15x22 size, answer "Yes" that it can span more than one page, and go to the full page editor and click the test strip button one time.  Click "Done" on the full page editor to close it and that's it.  You now have a 15x2 test strip of the 15x22 original ready to print.

There are other ways to do this, but the above is the easiest: (1) set up the page size to be the size of the strip you want, (2) add the print at the original (large) size, (3) click the test strip button one time.

Here's another way to do it without using the page size:

(1) Add the image to the queue at the final size you are testing for (say 17x24).  If you are asked about spanning more than one page, answer "Yes".

(2) Go to the full page editor and click the test strip button once, click "Done", and exit the FPE.

(3) On the main window, click on the print to select it and then set the size to the test strip size you want (say 17x2).

(4) You'll see the portion of the print that is selected.  If you'd like to select a different portion to print, go back to the FPE and use the cropping tool to click/drag.

Notes: In (2), you must exit the FPE and set the new test strip size on the main window.  You can re-set the strip size as many times as you like from the main window after step (4): Qimage knows it is now a test strip and whatever size you select on the main window is assumed to be that size test strip of the original.

So now you have two ways to make a test strip any size you like.  I personally prefer the first method because you can create the size strip you want on your printer and then save that as a file like "15x2-test-strip" and you can just reload that any time you want it.

Afterthought: to me, long/skinny test "strips" are not particularly useful.  I often use sizes like 3x2 or 4x6 and then just slide them to an important part of the print.  Skinny test strips often don't give you enough perspective to judge quality.  In addition, I sometimes have 4x6 paper that is the same type as my large 13x19 that I'm printing so printing a 4x6 test strip allows me to print a test portion on 4x6 paper that is the same type of paper as my 13x19.

Mike

Hi Fred,

I've tried it, many times. It does not work fine. I am uncertain if it works at all. It is tedious. There is a heck of a lot of clicking around, finding settings/buttons/ icons or whatever, just to achieve something basic in a print process. When cropping, (in the page editor) there seems to be a choice of shrinking the image - which is actually 'resizing' in my book - , or sort of changing the resolution. Either way, the ratio of the sides of the image stay the same as the original. It needs to be simply dragging a resizeable rectangle over the image. Maybe that is possible by setting something elsewhere, hidden away. Personally, I find much of the user interface for many relatively basic functions to be very obscure, even to the extent that an icon for a photographic crop button is a reversed 'P'.

I think it may be more straightforward to simply generate a proper test strip image in photoshop, and save it under a separate name, and then ensure I perform the same operations on it as I do for the main image.  The problem I am finding in Qimage, is that many ancillary options almost work in the way I want, but to get to the final level is often tedious, or not possible. And over the years Qimage has been developed, adding the extra functionality has obscured the ease of using the basic necessities, unless you have been with it from day one.

Thanks for your help,

Best wishes,

Ray

Hi Mike,

I'll try your ideas later, but that, at least the first, I understand.

Best wishes,

Ray

Ray, I got really close to the 2", and *he* has to trump me again. !!
 ;D ;D ;D ;D

I have made a printing shortcut in the HP driver for a specific paper, roll width, print page size (the last with its own "test strip" name). I have made the corresponding settings for that test print strip in Qimage and saved them. When I recall the settings in Qimage the printer driver does what it should do. There has been a time it didn't but several software and firmware upgrades in the last years did wonders to the interaction of the Z models and Qimage.

I use the Thumbnail Action crop on one or more images and guesstimate the size that fits with Original Size set. Goes quite good but as written, feedback of the crop size in mm's would be nice. That should be possible with Tiffs an Jpegs. Print and take the filters off the images again when finished or shift the crop to another spot if needed for the next proof. After that enlarge the print page or do a recall on a similar job made before the proof.

I have no objection to longer strips for proof prints. It often is reproduction work and quite big. The original is here too and at the same size. Confidence grows if the strip is on the original and no nasty color or tone differences are visible along the strip. Call it a crosscut proof. Of course this can be varied in size and one selects the parts that matter.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

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

Is it impossible to add the display of metric or imperial sizes of Tiffs and JPEGs in the Thumbnail Actions Filter when a crop is made ?  The size in pixels is displayed, the crop in pixels and the aspect ratio of the crop. As the original size is known of Tiffs and Jpegs most of the time it shouldn't be that difficult I guess. It would be handy in more cases than making proof crops. If there is no size recognised then a ? would be enough.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

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

Ernst,
There's an often missed feature in Qimage in the tools of the batch screen.
If you want to make 5 x 7 crops for proofs, or any other size, there's a button to the right of the image called Crop Wizard.
Just check the size you want, and Qimage automatically places a crop box over your image in the size you want; either landscape or portrait.
Then it locks that size crop in CROP LOCK allowing you to leave the results as you see them, or drag a corner of the crop maintaining the print size you selected.

Fred

Fred,

You mean in the Thumbnail Actions filter menu? I have been there before I asked the question. It is a real wizard on aspect ratios but doesn't do what I want. I like to pull a crop as flexible as possible and get direct eye feedback where it crops and on top of that it would be nice to have the actual size in mm's or inches based on original size data in the info that pops up when the crop is pulled. Or if that reduces speed add it in the info bars at the right when the crop lines are not pulled.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

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

Hi Ernst,

I think the user interface you are looking for is similar to my and many other folks requirements. It is easily simulated in photoshop, drop you image into a new larger image to represent a page, then using the crop tool, select the area you want, including any 'white space', whatever. The existing crop facility in Qimage does not have that ease of use. The test strip is a print function, its requirement being decided at print time, so using photoshop is nowhere near the best option for carrying this out. 

If, as I was trying to do in Qimage, the requirement is to crop an image that was not as wide as the page, then the image becomes distorted to the full page width. You have to fiddle around making unnecessary data entries.

Best wishes,

Ray

Qimage does not do "distortion" and never has.
You must distinguish between Image cropping using a filter and print cropping.

Again, you must distinguish between page size and print size, just because you may only print using a roll and set a page size to fill with print, don't forget you can have a print size anything you like within that printable area. That's what Q does and far easier than anything else because you work with linear dimensions (ins or mm).  If you want a print less than the page width, specify that dimension, either using a drop-down pre-set size of Custom. Then decide crop scissors off or on, white space within the print size or not when the aspect rations do not match.
You may be making a mountain out of a mole hill  ;D
How is it "unnecessary" when you want a size, you must have to specify it?  ???
Terry.

Hi Terry,

I spent hours trying the various methods of getting the test strip in the way in which I wanted, following closely, in particular, Mike's instructions on the previous page, and ones of my own derivation. However, they did not work for me. There was an assumption being made , that 'the test strip must be smaller or equal to the size of the original (in both dimensions)' - the case of a ten inch print in a 17inch wide strip had not been considered. If the image is smaller, then depending on other settings, the resulting image is stretched to fit, or as I said it is distorted.

It is unnecessary to have to specify a precise size by entering numbers, which may well need copying from elsewhere, compared to sliding a resizeable selection box over the area you wish to select.  My reference to the photoshop example in the previous posting was merely to show the sort of user interface for an easy way of doing this. For a test strip purpose, it needs to be emulated in the printing side of things in Qimage. It now appears that this is not possible. Sometimes precision is needed, sometimes it is not. It is tedious to have to enter precise sizes and dimensions when they are not required.

Whether it is a mountain or a molehill depends on the viewpoint of the user. This type of posting becomes lengthy when folk do not understand the question, because not enough information is given, or they don't read or understand what is being said. This type of posting becomes lengthy because folk do not give the full information, because the assumption is made that the reader will understand what they are thinking.

Best wishes,

Ray

Then you are not representing the finished print so not "testing" or simulating the finished item.
Sorry, that is not distortion in my book because the original pixel proportions of the image are maintained.
It's what Qimage does, specify a print size and it fills one dimension or both if the crop scissors are on.
The test strip feature is a special case; Mike said in his post which indicates that the final print resolution will be maintained.
Fitting a "test strip" into a print size larger then the original will inherently reduce the print resolution.

I agree, a picture paints a thousand words.
I still may not have understood what you want to do  ::)
Terry.

Terry,

The thread started with an aspect ratio action whether it was a bug or a feature is another thing. That has been removed now. There still are issues with deformed previews though. And crops that stick to the filed image.

Whether you use Original Image or a Custom Size, if one of the print page dimensions is overlapped by the selected image size and the other one not you do not get a crop on the intended size but a fill to the print page size + a crop. In all the examples of how it has to be done by Mike, Terry and Fred that is ignored as the choices are presented as either having the two print page dimensions larger or smaller than the image size choice. Just ignoring that problem doesn't help. Calling it the wrong sequence doesn't help either. It delivers no deformation but it doesn't deliver what is needed either

If you want to print an image on a wide format you will fit the image for 99% of the jobs within the size of the roll. That's why you bought a wide format. If you need a proof and it is time consuming to unload the roll you will use a strip of the roll. 3 inches is a nice size, it can be 4 inches too. That is not the problem. But if you use a strip for just one proof then use the total area of it as much as possible while keeping the 1:1 scale relation to the intended print, not the aspect ratio. To keep it simple use the total width of that roll, easy to recall a setting like that. The image however will fall within the total of that roll, that is why you bought a wide format. The image will be larger than the proof crop in the roll length dimension, 3 or 4 inch isn't much. So it will be larger in one dimension and smaller in the other dimension. And you will get the fit to page + crop you don't want.  The people in the know have shown all kinds of methods to avoid that and I can think of other methods too along that line. It is all tedious: repeating crop size reductions, setting new print page dimensions, another step to get that crop from another area of the image etc. It doesn't offer the proofs from more images on one test strip in an easy way either. Or what happens in practice too: more patches from one image printed on one proof print.

I can not create all that with Qimage's Thumbnail Actions Filter either but it goes a long way. An inclined test crop is even possible with straighten horizon tool. Changes the 1:1 resolution but I think not the original size relation. Have to test that. That tool with a mm or inch addition is all we need for proofing on a wide format.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

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

I'm actually considering a new forum format for Ernst and Ray.  Check it out and see what you think:

http://tinyurl.com/yfc7bxe

Don't say I don't aim to please!  ;)

Mike

Mike,


Ever wondered why this topic activated you, Terry and Fred and nobody else at that side of the fence and only two at the other side?

Could it be that this feature is hardly used for some reason and not at all to the grade Fred had to search for in the manual?

I have not seen a list of requests that was promised a year or so ago. Maybe a poll on urgency of the requests and a poll on what users would like to see changed in existing features? It is entirely true that you are open for requests and discussions but at some point you find it very hard to recognise some logic in the arguments of others if it doesn't follow your predestined path.

That trinity thing you three have there may not be so healthy for Qimage after all. That is just a personal opinion of course.



met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

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

Last time I checked, a trinity beats a duo!  ;)  And no, I have no plans to cater to the (honestly quite oddball in some cases) requests of one or two users.  That's how you end up with a mess in software.  You each have your mouths and your say.  My job is one of calibration.  Everyone has opinions and everyone has different needs.  If I went off following every little ant in the colony one at a time, I'd end up nowhere.  Not calling myself a "queen" here but I have to try to make sense of the movement of the entire colony.

BTW, I assume we're still on the subject of test strips.  As I told Ray via email, I hadn't anticipated users asking for a test strip that is wider than the original print like asking for a 44 inch wide test strip of a 36x24 print.  As a result, there is a bug when you request a test strip that is longer/wider than the original print.  That will get fixed, but for now if you're looking for a 3 inch test strip from a print, just click the test strip button and then select "New Size" and set the size to the longest edge of your print in one direction and 3 inches in the other.  It's that simple.  Want a 36x3 inch test strip from a 36x24 print?  Just add the print at the 36x24 size, click the test strip button in the full page editor, then right click on the print to "New Size", "Custom" and enter 36x3 as the size.  My point: it can be done properly... easily.

You may not like doing it that way but it works.  When I'm doing a horizon correction, I don't particularly like having to use the "measure tool", then using the "rotate canvas" function to manually rotate based on what I just "measured", then ending up with a result that still needs four triangles (which no one will want) cropped out of each edge of the image.  That's why I don't use PhotoShop for horizon corrections.   I use Qimage which can do the same thing including a precise final crop in three clicks of the mouse.  Different tools end up with different methods due to their purpose.

Mike

Ernst with all due respect, I do not belong to a holy trinity since only my socks are holey. Smiley
I do take issue with you, however, when you single out Terry and me as being against anyone or anything in particular.
I do also take issue when your requests are so convoluted that no one can even follow your problem.
That's why there are only THREE that reply.
I had already explained to you once before that I checked the HELP file on the test strips, not because I cannot understand them, but because I never use them. There's a difference. I do not print huge prints so my paper loss draws no tears if I have to reprint one.
Next item I must take issue...
When I get in here to try to help people, it is because I am trying to help someone achieve what I believe is a task that he/she needs done.
I have no ax to grind except when you keep coming up with the gospel according to Photo Shop and consider it a biblical publication.
If that were so, Mike would never sell a single Qimage because Photo Shop did every thing perfectly including printing.
For example, and I know you will fight to the death, spaghetti throwing at 20 paces, that you make sized files (e.g. 5 x 7, 8 x 10) in Photo Shop and then want to bring them into Qimage as such.
There is no such thing. You may size the ratio of pixels from X and Y axis to be in a 5 x 7 ratio, but that will also print at 2.5 x 3.5 and come out the same.
That's where I jump in to defend Qimage and many people that do not have/use Photo Shop by telling them that Qimage will make a perfect 5 x 7, better than Photo Shop and without image cropping.
Qimage is loaded with features that would otherwise stay obscured if I didn't try to explain how to do what they ask for in Qimage.
Except for swapping heads on subjects or making phony clouds and sky, and some cloning, Qimage can do most anything simpler and faster than you can request in your convoluted attempt to make Qimage into Photo Shop.

Trinity healthy or not for Qimage?
When Terry spends hours working on the expansion prints for Canvass print stretching and then finds time to create greeting type wrapping paper for the holidqy season all using Qimage, I think that's healthy.
When I spend time working out printer setups for those having difficulty getting them all in order and post it so others can use the information too, I think that's healthy.
When you asked about cropping to a size, I responded with the Crop Wizard.
There are two basic ways to crop. One way is to crop aesthetically, meaning crop for beauty and effect not worrying about the print size. Frame to be determined later.
The second way is to have the frame size and print size in mind, and crop for that ratio.
Both of these are simply done in Qimage.
You were offended because you felt that my offering of help was beneath you?
It might have been, but it wasn't beneath everyone's acumen.

I think I have said enough for you to understand what I do here.
It is a forum, open to all, with help and learning going on for all of us, with me especially learning; citing the new stretch and mirror borders for printing.
Never heard of such a thing before. I do now! I am grateful to those that spent time creating this feature and refining the feature.

I have great respect for your knowledge and abilities, especially in the HP large printer area, and would not demean your roll on the forum.
I expect a small percetage of that same respect from you.

With regards,
Fred

Mike,

Yes, I think we are back on the subject. First time I see you write that it is considered a bug and may get solved. I have tried your temporary solution but I do not know what makes the difference between your system and mine. With original size and metric units it doesn't obey your rules. In that case I'll wait for the bug solution and use my temporary solution.

The straighten horizon feature looks alright to me, yesterday and today.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

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

I'd like to say something, but I won't - oops! just did  :o

The answer is posted a few post's back, by Mike - there is a bug, he will fix it.

Fred, I respect my elders

elder flower cordial is quite nice, as is elderberry and apple pie......
 
I will ignore the rest of it.

Best wishes,

young Ray

Units of measure don't matter.  The bug is related to page size and test strips that are bigger than the original print size in one direction but not the other.  It currently works properly if you first specify the actual test strip size (with no "extra" border) as the page size OR if you start with a page big enough to hold the print to begin with.  So either start with a page size that doesn't exceed the tests strip size in either direction or do it this way:

Pick the page size you'd normally use for the final print.  Example: you want to print a 40x30 inch print on a 44 inch wide roll.  So you set the paper size to 44 wide by 30+ tall.  Now add your 40x30 print to the queue.  It will not prompt you for a poster... because the page is big enough for the full size print.  Click the test strip button once and then right click on the print and select "New Size", "Custom", "40x3".  You now have a 40x3 test strip from the 40x30 original.  You'll see that the DPI matches and it is a proper test strip.  NOW change your page length to 3 inches, 5 inches or whatever you want.  Bypassing the poster feature bypasses the bug.  The bug is never there if you start with a page big enough to hold the original/full size print and you specify a test strip size that doesn't exceed the original print size in either direction!

Mike

Fred,

Isn't it a sign that noone else participated in this thread because it is a complex route to get your test strip crops done, especially if things are not falling in the sheets on a desktop machine category? Could it be that they just throw 4 smaller images on a sheet and consider that a proof because it is more of a hassle through that test print feature? Or just set a smaller size on the full width of the sheet and print half a crop and the next time the other half. Where I refer to that trinity thing it is in the sense that you are reassuring one another that it is good while I think that there are users that need Qimage for another kind of jobs than you are used to. For example depend more on the test strip function while it may not work well for them. So not holy but then the three high on a mountain.

The same goes for the Original Size subject. We have been there before.  I get all kinds of images from people. I could get a list of formats for every image that I have to print and apply the sizes in Qimage. It is just easier and delivers less faults when I get the files with the sizes they have to have in the print. And like I explained to Terry in the past you can add a size to an image in Photoshop without a resampling done. Nothing degrades that way, no flexibility in Qimage is lost. I even suggest that it would be a nice feature for Qimage to add that virtual size in inches or cm. It is nothing more than that. It is also easier for repeat jobs.  We have lost Qimage logs in the past when the default was still on the last 100 jobs. A Tiff that has the size attached at least tells me what size it probably has been. Then there is the educational aspect, a customer that has to fix the size in Photoshop is confronted with the aspect ratio. If he calls me that a 50x65 cm print must be printed at a size 110x90 cm I have to explain him that something has to be compromised. If he does it himself then he can take the time to think it over when that 110 side doesn't deliver a 90 cm side in rescaling. Next time I ask him to add 10 cm borders and he knows then that that changed the total aspect ratio. And I tell them not to resample.

I'm not a Photoshop advocate, I have some issues with its CM and never touch its printing side. I advocate Qimage on other lists. Do a search on my name and Qimage. That has been going on for at least 6 years. In this list however I ask how things have to be done and what I see as possible extentions and what doesn't work for me. Next to more general help I give from time to time. I'm not the guy to preach to the choir on Qimage's merits. I thank Mike for solutions made that help me too.

Terry's excercises in canvas wrap land could have happened three years ago. And I probably would have been supportive in defining them and trying them out. I asked for that feature then but it wasn't honored for yet unclear reasons. The reasons mentioned lost their value three weeks ago it seems. I wouldn't have made the Canvas Wrap Actions in PS then but I needed them so I made them. Been there so to speak. Have been using them for 3 years and more people use them, Qimage users among them. They do what is needed for canvas printing on wide formats.

I wasn't offended by your help but like the scout that helps the old lady to the other side of the street it helps to listen first where the other one wants to go and take that serious. The solutions you have may not work for the other person. I have respect for your efforts to help people and from time to time I learn something and use it. But not all your solutions are mine and I'm sure it is the same the other way around. A healthy situation that that is possible in Qimage.

I think when Mike calls what I have been struggling with a bug then there must have been something wrong in the tool provided. Maybe something I could define in this thread.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

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

A Joke Is One Thing. ;)

But I must say true colors are showing.
I thought this forum was really going to go some place.
No, I won't name Names .. but I will say:
All you have to do is look at the Statistics Center: http://ddisoftware.com/tech/stats/

People are willing to learn and help .. but they won't Post if they feel they will be singled out or
it's a No No if they say they use a certain progam before they use Qimage.

You want people to think your the best .. I think it's time you act like your The Best!

Remember: Your way is not always the right way for the next person!

Ya Me

Hi YaMe, how are you doing?
Yes but look at the detail of those who post the most and work out the percentage of the posts that are helping users to solve problems or understand how to use DDI programs.
I think you'll find it's a very high proportion, even higher when you exclude the jokes  ;D
Terry.

Hi Terry

I will say I enjoy reading all of your posts!
I think I could ask:
What type of grass should I use to plant on the roof of my house and you would have an answer for me :) :)
Not don't use grass use oats  ;)

Ya Me

My forum so I get the final say here.   ;D  I'm closing this thread as obviously there is nothing left of any value here.

Let me just say that every online forum has little cliques that have their own "agenda".  People like Fred, Terry, Brian, Eljae, Jeff, Dennis, and others tend to write posts that encourage and help others with questions the majority of the time.  Others (about three or four on this particular forum who shall go nameless) tend to want their voices to be louder than everyone else's and they think they are entitled to a direct line to Qimage development, bypassing most other "average" users.  They think they know best, their way is the right way, and they don't understand why I didn't implement some suggestion they made in 2007.  As a result, they tend to be negative most of the time and only pipe up to complain about something with just a few positives or helpful posts thrown in along the way as "bread crumbs".  It's OK that they are on a mission, but as I said before, my job is one of calibration and I'm the one who has to grease the squeaky wheels and factor in the "loud mouths" who think their way is the only way along with the consensus of the Qimage consortium as a whole: meaning your list of features may not have the same priority as the general Qimage user base.  And no, I'm not singling out Ernst as there are other even bigger "voices" here, nor am I saying nothing can be gained by persistent voices as Ernst (and Ray) have allowed me to find a bug in the test strips.  All I can say is, keep the faith, and let's move on.

When looking at someone's "stats" on this forum, better click on the poster's name and then click "Show Posts" to see what they are actually posting, whether they are helping out, just making suggestions, or always complaining about something.  That counts a lot more than the total number of posts!

Mike