Mike Chaney's Tech Corner
April 19, 2024, 04:27:07 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Qimage registration expired? New lifetime licenses are only $59.99!
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Professional Photo Printing Software for Windows
Print with
Qimage and see what you've been missing!
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
Author Topic: Different borders  (Read 26702 times)
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3247



View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: August 06, 2010, 09:17:49 AM »

Hi Ernst,
Quote
You are entirely right on Qimage's precision in metrics and inches and I did not argue that fact, I know it is like that.
Yes, but others had said otherwise elsewhere, perhaps I should have posted there instead.
Quote
It rounds it off to whole mm's. Which can lead to related issues as I notice in practice
It's not so bad when you are aware of it. I recently checked the FPE and the arrow keys give incremental movements of 0.15 mm. Once you know that, good precision can be obtained.
Terry
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 410


View Profile Email
« Reply #16 on: August 06, 2010, 09:43:01 AM »


Quote
It rounds it off to whole mm's. Which can lead to related issues as I notice in practice
It's not so bad when you are aware of it. I recently checked the FPE and the arrow keys give incremental movements of 0.15 mm. Once you know that, good precision can be obtained.
Terry

Terry,

If you work with metrics daily it is a xxx*. To the degree that I once considered to use Qimage in imperial mode. I'm on a computersystem with a GUI, I'm not going to count the number of arrow key actions. If I select an image in the print page editor I like to see its position in the blink of an  eye at 0.25 mm precise or alike. Like you can when you use inches. I'm living in a metric world. Not too lazy to translate measurements in inches when in an email discussion as I otherwise get a reply what the size is in inches. Which shows that while we can compute everything there is a desire to keep things simple in daily practice. My daily practice is metric.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
Logged
BrianPrice
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 265



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #17 on: August 06, 2010, 10:45:13 AM »

Quote
It is not the computing metric<>imperial I'm thinking off, I have to do it often too. I ask this because a 1mm difference on a 10mm border is quite visible. That's the kind of borders the thread started with. And cutting that kind of borders with a 1mm error would show in my opinion. Cutting with 0.25mm precision is doable. One way or another I get the impression that the 1mm looks smaller in the imperial eye than in the metric eye. It is less than 1/25th of an inch so to speak.

Ernst
I agree with everything you have said, I can see the differences in borders you mentioned and can trim even borders without measuring, but few people without printing (or engineering  Cheesy ) experience can. It's always nice to be exact, and I always try to be, but sometimes it's not necessary depending on the end user. When I said trimming to 1mm could be a problem,  I was thinking of some of the folks I used to work with  Angry (I've recently retired).

My original point was that the 3800 paper feed is not precise or exact, although the printing is. When I worked with a 7600 I could print or overprint and be totally confident of the feed, this is not the case with the 3800 (in my experience).

Terry, I'll try your suggestion later.

Brian
Logged
Oldfox
Newbie
*
Posts: 38


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: August 06, 2010, 12:51:40 PM »

Quote
Your Qimage 11 attachment, did that have negative margins? I can't see why some border should be missing on the rhs. This should all be very straightforward
RM is Fixed=3.034mm, Additional=-8mm, Total -4.966mm
All others Additonal=0, Total 2.963mm (bottom 3.034mm)

This gave me hope because the right hand side of the print looks ok to me. (after changing all border colors to white).

Quote
Quote
I found out that there are also Page Margins within Qimage.
These are the same as the driver produces; Qimage is just reporting what they are, not a separate or additional value - until you edit in Qimage.

You cannot change the margins in the Epson driver. According to the manual you can do it in Mac, but not in Win, which I have.

Quote
Quote
I suppose my problem should be possible to solve with Qimage. Qimage "knows" the Epson physical margins. All it has do is to include them when calculating the final output.

Yes, it does that already.

I think not. Otherwise there would not be problem at all. Attachment shows how the margins and borders should come out in this case.

I have come to the conclusion that my "problem" cannot be solved within Qimage.

/old Fox
Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3247



View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: August 06, 2010, 01:17:16 PM »

Hi Oldfox,
Quote
Attachment shows how the margins and borders should come out in this case.

It's pity this diagram was not shown earlier on, it makes it quite clear what your requirements are.

Quote
I have come to the conclusion that my "problem" cannot be solved within Qimage.
You are right. Your requirement shows in effect unequal borders, 2 at 7mm and 2 at 10mm and Qimage does not do unequal borders.
I assumed, because borderless does not work, that with having to have page margins, you would either accept a smaller image or smaller borders and trim the page margins from the print.
Oh well, after a few diversions we got there but probably not to your satisfaction.

I just remembered, all is not lost because there is a way to do it in Qimage. It's a bit complicated and involves having a plain white image behind each picture, which is larger and offset from the picture. The white background image creates the border. If this is a regular requirement, a template can be made, so just the picture images need be added.
If you want more explanation, come back to me.
Terry
Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3247



View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: August 06, 2010, 01:28:23 PM »

Brian,
Quote
Terry, I'll try your suggestion later.
No need to bother now. See Oldfox's last post and the diagram, the requirement is in fact unequal borders which can't be done with Borders. It can be fiddled though, see my post.
Terry
Logged
Oldfox
Newbie
*
Posts: 38


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: August 06, 2010, 01:37:15 PM »

Quote
It's pity this diagram was not shown earlier on, it makes it quite clear what your requirements are.

I thought that the first picture in the first post would show what I wanted. Sorry that it was not clear enough.

Thx for your help. This exercise has been useful to me, still.
Logged
rayw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 440


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: August 06, 2010, 06:15:48 PM »

Hi Oldfox,

I'm hesitating to add anything at this late stage, but it may work better if you 'fudge' the paper size in the epson printer - e.g. make a custom size, say 6mm bigger than A4, but still load a4 paper. Also, you can possibly put a spacer to shift the paper 3mm away from the existing lhs guide - a few bits of card and sticky tape would be good enough to try. Of course, you may have to do somersaults in the calculations you make.

Just an idea you may want to try, no guarantee it'll work for you, or even worth trying (just don't blame me if you get tape stuck to the printhead/whatever  Huh?).

Best wishes,

Ray
Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3247



View Profile WWW
« Reply #23 on: August 06, 2010, 07:23:25 PM »

Quote
but it may work better if you 'fudge' the paper size in the epson printer
Cunning idea. It could work for the sides of the paper, what about the leading edge (short side)? It would be difficult to fool the printer edge sensing for that  Roll Eyes
Terry
Logged
Fred A
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 5644



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #24 on: August 06, 2010, 08:30:44 PM »

Quote
I used to work with   Angry (I've recently retired).

Brian,
I just checked with Mike, and after 100 posts, you need to provide an icon image of yourself that  represents your visage after you retired from your old job which we all took to be the boatman, Charon, taking lost souls across the river Styx.
Now that you admit to having retired, AKA joining the Old Folks, it is a forum rule that you provide a more current image.
Everyone is waiting for your personal representation.
After all, I posted one of me, Terry did a movie of himself, and last but not least, Jeff, the Grumpy one! Grin Grin
Your turn!

Fred


Logged
rayw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 440


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: August 06, 2010, 11:46:29 PM »

Hi Terry,

Quote
what about the leading edge (short side)

If it's a white border, (hopefully narrower than the desired border around each photo) then you will most likely have to turn off any printed crop marks, and reposition the templates, but probably easier to just make the required extra guillotine cut. An alternative would be to mount the A4 sheet on a larger carrier, similar to folk who manage to print on canvas using printers not designed for that, but that is even more fiddly. If you print on a roll, however, it can probably be ignored (but the op is not using roll paper).

But, if it is white borders you turn off the borders/crop marks in qimage then the problem goes away. I think you could generate a custom template and simply position the images as required and use a stop on the guillotine to give the even borders. ( I may have missed something here, the original question is not in my memory Huh?)

Best wishes,

Ray
Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3247



View Profile WWW
« Reply #26 on: August 07, 2010, 06:57:07 AM »

Ray,
Quote
( I may have missed something here, the original question is not in my memory Huh)
Ummm, yes you have, too complicated to explain, read Oldfox's stuff again.   Shocked I think this is finished with now.  Wink

Terry
Logged
Jeff
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 763



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #27 on: August 07, 2010, 07:08:27 AM »

Quote
I used to work with   Angry (I've recently retired).


After all, I posted one of me, Terry did a movie of himself, and last but not least, Jeff, the Grumpy one! Grin Grin
Your turn!

Fred

I give explanation Cry

Photo taken after a lawn picknic - my usual state after a bottle of wine Smiley

Grumpy is down to Google.  When setting up a Blog  http://grumpy-jeff.blogspot.com/  I could not get Google to accept a sensible name and after about a dozen attempts I was getting quite 'Grumpy' so I entered grumpy-jeff and for a password I gave penis, they accepted the name but rejected the password - not long enough must be 8 char.  That really upset me so I gave cobblers spelled with a B and finally got my blog address.

Jeff  
Logged

Grumpy
Oldfox
Newbie
*
Posts: 38


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: August 07, 2010, 07:56:22 AM »

Quote
I think this is finished with now.  Wink

That's what I also thought yesterday. This morning I started to play with margins and other variables involved. And I managed to get a satisfactory result. It may not be accurate in terms of millimeters (because Epson does not tell what is the difference between Min. Mid and Max Enlargement with Borderless) but it is good enough for my purposes.

Auto cropping:   On
Borderless:        On, Expansion: Min
Borders:            1=5mm, 2=5mm

Margins:
                 Left     Top   Right  Bottom
Fixed        0,000   0,000   0,070   0,070
Additional  0,000   1,000   1,000   2,000
Total        0,000   1,000   1,070   2,070

See attachment.

/(young again) Fox
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 07:58:19 AM by Oldfox » Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3247



View Profile WWW
« Reply #29 on: August 07, 2010, 08:55:51 AM »

Hi (young)Fox  Wink
Quote
And I managed to get a satisfactory result.
I'm pleased to hear you got it sorted. I hope you've saved that set-up for future use.
Thanks for letting us know.
Terry
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Security updates 2022 by ddisoftware, Inc.