Mike Chaney's Tech Corner
November 23, 2024, 06:56:05 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 Login Register  
Mike Chaney's Tech Corner > Mike's Software > Qimage > Is it possible to have more precision with metric units?
Pages: [1]
« previous next »
  Print  
Author Topic: Is it possible to have more precision with metric units?  (Read 9035 times)
Zaphod
Newbie
*
Posts: 5
« on: March 01, 2010, 04:25:52 PM »
Hello everyone,

This is my first post here, I'm using Qimage for a few months now, to prepare my Photobooks for printing (I make full page JPEG that I send to the photobook printing company).

I make for example 30 cm * 30 cm pages @ 300 dpi, with 1 or several photos on it, and use Print to File function.

On my last book I saw that some of my images were not perfectly aligned together, or in some cases the alignments are OK, but I have 3 photos on 1 page and there is more space between photo 1 & 2 than between photo 2 & 3.
(I saw this on the JPEGs before sending them)

On my pages in Qimage, all the photos are supposed to be aligned if I look at the "print location area".
The problem is that this information shows only precision to 1 mm, and with 300 dpi, 1 mm makes nearly 12 pixels...
So there can be 1-2 pixels misalignments without any ability to see them in Qimage.

All this would be much easier if there was a possibility to have more precise information than 1 mm.
Is this possible? If no, will it be possible in the future?
Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3251



WWW
« Reply #1 on: March 01, 2010, 04:52:06 PM »
Hi "Zaphod",
Quote
All this would be much easier if there was a possibility to have more precise information than 1 mm.
Is this possible? If no, will it be possible in the future?
A few things that should be of help to you: -

There is a tick box to show rulers.
Although the "readout" of the position dimensions in the full page editor are in whole mm, you can enter decimal values directly to increase precision.
With an image on the page selected, the arrow keys will nudge the position of the image and a little experimentation will tell you how many clicks there are per mm.
Finally, to get absolute alignment with another image on the page, CTRL Arrow will align the edge the selected image to another on the page. If more than one, in different positions, just continue to use CTRL.Arrow until the desired alignment is reached.

Terry.
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 410


Email
« Reply #2 on: March 01, 2010, 06:53:38 PM »
Quote from: Zaphod on March 01, 2010, 04:25:52 PM
Hello everyone,

This is my first post here, I'm using Qimage for a few months now, to prepare my Photobooks for printing (I make full page JPEG that I send to the photobook printing company).

I make for example 30 cm * 30 cm pages @ 300 dpi, with 1 or several photos on it, and use Print to File function.

On my last book I saw that some of my images were not perfectly aligned together, or in some cases the alignments are OK, but I have 3 photos on 1 page and there is more space between photo 1 & 2 than between photo 2 & 3.
(I saw this on the JPEGs before sending them)

On my pages in Qimage, all the photos are supposed to be aligned if I look at the "print location area".
The problem is that this information shows only precision to 1 mm, and with 300 dpi, 1 mm makes nearly 12 pixels...
So there can be 1-2 pixels misalignments without any ability to see them in Qimage.

All this would be much easier if there was a possibility to have more precise information than 1 mm.
Is this possible? If no, will it be possible in the future?

The internal  precision of Qimage is better than 1 mm and you can change sizes, positions in smaller steps than 1mm but on some places the feedback is per 1 mm, on other spots it is more precise. I miss that precision mainly in the Full Page Editor and it would be nice to have it also in the queue feedback. An old request that more people using metrics would like to see solved. Right now the inch precision in feedback is 4x that of metrics, if 0.1 mm steps would be available metric is only 2.5x ahead. There's no substitute for a slightly better feedback in metrics in my opinion.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
Logged
Zaphod
Newbie
*
Posts: 5
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2010, 12:38:50 PM »
Hi,

Quote from: Terry-M on March 01, 2010, 04:52:06 PM
Although the "readout" of the position dimensions in the full page editor are in whole mm, you can enter decimal values directly to increase precision.
Thanks for the information.
I'll try this next time.

It sure will be easier to be able to visualize these decimal values.
(when I make a verification on my page layout, I do it with the values).

Quote from: Terry-M on March 01, 2010, 04:52:06 PM
With an image on the page selected, the arrow keys will nudge the position of the image and a little experimentation will tell you how many clicks there are per mm.
Yes, but sometimes I need also to have the same distance between several images.
For example, when I have 3 landscapes images on the same page, I want exactly the same distance between images 1 and 2 and images 2 and 3.

Now that I'm aware of a possible problem... I'll make my layouts with much more attention...

For me a 0.1mm precision on measurement display would be great...
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 410


Email
« Reply #4 on: April 12, 2010, 08:23:29 AM »
Quote from: Zaphod on March 09, 2010, 12:38:50 PM

For me a 0.1mm precision on measurement display would be great...



This topic shouldn't fall off the cliff.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
« previous next »
 
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.