Re: [Gimp-print-devel] STC800 problems (was Print plugin 3.0.6 bug report)

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

   Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 20:18:25 +0100
   From: "Stefan K. Berg" <sf...@co...>

   Robert L Krawitz wrote:
   >> [snip]
   >> I did, but found 24/1 to be the best looking so far (very small
   >> horizontal stripes) and it looks just right in size compared to the
   >> output in microweave 720. All the other variations has been too
   >> large vertically. Talking strictly proportionally, it would seem
   >> that 24/0 would be a great setting...
   > 
   >  Wow.  What happens in high and highest quality mode, and with 1440?
   >  Is it much faster than microweave?  How is the quality?  It might be
   >  that the 800 can actually do microweave well.

   Well, I haven't tested 1440 yet. I have enough trouble with the
   other modes...

   Faster than microweave? Huh? Every higher mode is slower and slower
   to print - testing 720 DPI highest quality made me go out for
   dinner. :) Can't really judge the quality yet due to the banding
   problems, see below.

Here's my question: is 720 microweave as fast as 720 softweave?  If
so, then there may be no need to support softweave on this printer.

   I've found this out so far, going with the 24/1 setting for now -
   you probably agree that that was the best one of the ones tested:

   Original (new) picture: http://home.swipnet.se/consultron/tulip.jpg

   The three following at http://home.swipnet.se/consultron/tulip1.jpg:

   360 microweave: Banding. Severe banding. Interestingly enough, the
   bands are pink, the same as the tulip in the center of the
   picture. You'll spot this one easy.

Not too surprising.  360 is for proofing only.  We can probably adjust
the droplet size to improve the quality.

   720 microweave: The best looking one. Almost untracable banding.

The magenta has problems, as usual :-(  Try printing with a bit more
saturation?

   Is it possible that this banding might be a problem in the
   algorithms, or should I continue to try different nozzle/separation
   configurations?

If 720 microweave is fast, don't bother -- this will be a
microweave-only printer.  I suspect that the same will be true for all
of the early printers, but I don't have access to a Pro, Pro XL, 400,
500, 600, 850, 1520, or 3000.

Guess it means I'll have to get 1440 microweave working again...

-- 
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