Re: [Gimp-print-devel] Print plugin 3.0.6 bug report

[Robert L K. <rl...@al...>]

   Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 00:10:28 +0100
   From: "Stefan K. Berg" <sf...@co...>
   CC: gim...@li...

   Robert L Krawitz wrote:
   > 
   >    Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 19:22:36 +0100
   >    From: "Stefan K. Berg" <sf...@co...>
   >    CC: gim...@li...
   > 
   >    Robert L Krawitz wrote:
   > 
   >    > Could you try a couple of other things?
   >    >
   >    > 1) Try changing MODEL_MAKE_NOZZLES(64) to MODEL_MAKE_NOZZLES(24).
   >    >
   >    > 2) At line 2447, the following appears:
   >    >
   >    >               fprintf(prn, "\033.%c%c%c%c", 1, 8 * 5, 5,
   >    >
   >    > Please change the "8 * 5" to "5" (not in quotes, of course).
   >    >
   >    > 3) At line 2407, the following appears:
   >    >
   >    >       if (escp2_has_cap(model, MODEL_1440DPI_MASK, MODEL_1440DPI_YES))
   >    >
   >    > Please change it to
   >    >
   >    >       if (escp2_has_cap(model, MODEL_1440DPI_MASK, MODEL_1440DPI_YES) &&
   >    >           ydpi > 720)
   >    >
   >    > Let me know if anything changes in softweave mode.
   > 
   >    Yes indeed, this time I get output of about the right size but it
   >    looks very garbled. I've scanned the output of 720 DPI Softweave
   >    mode, which you will find at
   >    http://home.swipnet.se/consultron/scan1.gif (96 kB). The black ink
   >    has bled through my inkjet paper. Also, the printer made some
   >    strange noises when printing this - a quiet but noticable
   >    "whooshing" sound from time to time.
   > 
   > 1) Could you try to identify which of the three changes made it work
   >    (try them one at a time)?  That would be extremely helpful.

   The second one, the fprintf. The third one doesn't seem to change anything.

Really.  That's very interesting.  Remind me again what you have --
it's an 800, right?  In a way, this is good news; the only issue is
whether some printers need the 5 and some need the 40.

   > 2) It's apparent that the inter-row spacing (which is set to 8) is
   >    incorrect.  My suspicion is that the proper value should be 6, and
   >    that MODEL_MAKE_NOZZLES(48) is correct here.  This can be tested by
   >    changing MODEL_MAKE_SEPARATION(8) to MODEL_MAKE_SEPARATION(6).
   >    It's not impossible that the right value is 12 or even 16, though.

   I tried a number of variations, but so far the best one was 32 nozzles and
   a separation of one. That gave me white horizontal stripes, but otherwise an
   OK picture. I have done several tests and scanned them into

   http://home.swipnet.se/consultron/scan2.jpg (188 kB)

None of those are correct.  Could you also try 64/4, 32/4, and 64/16?
And if none of those look correct, 32/16 (although that strikes me as
unlikely)?

-- 
Robert Krawitz <rl...@al...>      http://www.tiac.net/users/rlk/

Tall Clubs International  --  http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail lp...@uu...
Project lead for The Gimp Print --  http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton