At 01:00 PM 6/14/2002 -0700, Dennis Saputelli wrote:
>i can see the submil cracks in my defective virtual shorts quite easily
>in CAMtastic
>
>i would agree that it is a better tool for looking at gerbers than
>protel

Just to note, Mr. Saputelli's problem with virtual shorts was due, as I 
recall, to roundoff error in the gerber generation. The cracks would *also* 
have been visible, I expect, in gerber reimported to Protel. My point about 
Protel being better in the submil region is that the display routines are 
more accurate, even if the gerber generation is a tad shaky at times.

The Protel *database* has a substantially finer resolution than what 
CAMtastic stores, I think, and the display routines are pretty good (though 
they will sometimes show pixel cracks where none exist, but those cracks do 
not widen upon zooming in, and sometimes they even disappear at some zoom 
levels.


************************************************************************
* Tracking #: 9B6F3A185E8E7048AB780FCCD728F97049C52796
*
************************************************************************

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to