cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (10/26/87)
Ron Minnich started this with his claim that DPaint couldn't print pictures, this is a generalized comment to Keiths last comment which contained ... In article <1822@cadovax.UUCP> keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) writes: > Actually, this is one issue to which I can agree. I bought the $199 > Cannon inkjet, and the basic output via DPaint does suck. But it's not > the printers fault, and I don't really think it was DPaint's fault, > it's apparently the fact that C= felt that the way to handle unknown > resolution printers was to scale bitmaps, and this tends to take forever > and look like shit. First the Output from Dpaint I really sucked, but with Dpaint II it is possible to get really nice output *if you work at it*. By combining the margin settings, percentage of width used, etc, you can make the printer device print at a 1:1 ratio. Also you can look at the enhancer booklet for 1.2 to see how the printer device calculates the various ways to print things (really strangely). Anyway, the DPaint II printer requester contains most of the fields needed to get the output you want from it. (Some others like density need to be set from preferences). > The MacIntosh seems to get around this somehow, perhaps > by avoiding the problem by making you buy an Apple approved printer of > a known resolution and making sure all Apple approved printers have > close enough resolution so that they don't have to scale the bitmaps. The Macintosh (no funky capitalizations) basically does graphics dumps to only two printers, the ImageWriter and the LaserWriter. In both cases the *printer* regenerates the graphics from scratch. You see you send Drawing commands to the ImageWriter and PostScript commands to the LaserWriter. Because these drawing commands are fairly generalized they can effectively use all of the resolution of the printer. The Amiga on the other hand, is stuck taking its bitmap and cramming it into the printers constraints. Not easy to do. >Obviously few of you out there have tried to use a 24 pin printer, as >the @Q)*#&%)(* speed of the driver at such resolutions is appalling. >If any of you had been using it in that manner we'd have heard more >flaming. 20-30 minutes for a screen dump! Bah! I see some help coming from C/A on this one. Maybe in 1.3. I definitely would like to see some improvements in the printer device, among them : o Default to *no* scaling if the bitmap will fit within the margins. Don't even worry about aspect ratio if you can avoid it. o A preferences gadget for *Density* rather than using 'Custom Paper' which is not intuitive at all and not supported on all printers either. --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
daveb@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Berezowski) (10/27/87)
In article <31962@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes: > >I see some help coming from C/A on this one. Maybe in 1.3. > >I definitely would like to see some improvements in the printer device, >among them : > o Default to *no* scaling if the bitmap will fit within the margins. > Don't even worry about aspect ratio if you can avoid it. DONE (sort of, there is an integer scaling option) > > o A preferences gadget for *Density* rather than using 'Custom Paper' > which is not intuitive at all and not supported on all printers > either. DONE > > >--Chuck McManis >uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com >These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. ...progress in motion.