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/[email protected] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
