Yes, and I will answer you in private mail about this common problem, to
not further antagonize anyone here.
Art
Bill Grimwood wrote:
Yesterday while printing with my Epson Photo EX the printer started
printing black lines across the print into the margin on the paper. In
about three
At 16:59 26/02/2001 -0500, you wrote:
You can get it at:
ftp://ftp.adobe.com/pub/adobe/photoshop/win/6.x/photoshop601up.exe
downloaded 40 minutes ago using wsftp, netscape wasn't helpful.
"Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow
in Australia".
Austin Franklin wrote:
"FTP Error: 550
Access denied - No such file or directory.
Path /pub/adobe/magic/photoshop/win/6.x/photoshop601up.exe doesn't exist or
you don't have permission to use this file."
That's what happens when I try to access that file. The FTP directory
listing does
Thanks to the many Filmscanners who helped solve my problem(SS 4000 not
recognized in Win 2K). Conclusion was.
1. Install new drivers for the AdvanSys ABP-3922-00 SCSI card from
http://www.connectcom.net/downloads/fastultra.html. Connect.com is the new
name for the AdvanSys site. This installed
Dale Gail wrote:
You can get it at:
ftp://ftp.adobe.com/pub/adobe/magic/photoshop/win/6.x/photoshop601up.exe
This works. The problem is they're so busy it's hard to get through. After
about 200 tries, I got through and it immediately started uploading the
update file to me. I've installed
As I prepare for scanning for these size prints, it will help me, and I
suspect others, if some of you scanning for quality 8.5 x 11 and 13 x 17
prints from 35mm in either b w or color will comment on:
I do not vary my scan for output size. I always scan at the optical
resolution of the
Thanks
Bill
At 09:11 AM 2/27/01 +1000, you wrote:
Bill wrote:
Yesterday while printing with my Epson Photo EX the printer started
printing black lines across the print into the margin on the paper. In
about three years with this printer I have never encountered this problem
before.
The
I got the SAME error msg yesterday, but not today..It went right in...BUT..I
wish I knew exactly what I have..ie..what are the "updates?"...Eddie Wiseman
- Original Message -
From: "Austin Franklin" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 8:19 AM
Subject:
Has anyone had any errors when installing this? I got a "ComponentMoveData"
error #-115.
Marvin writes ...
I am confused as to the techniques that are used.
I had the pleasure of viewing a CD of b w TIFF
scans this past weekend, made by a professional
photographer, who is at the level that he has had
photographs published by National Geographic.
He told me he had scanned the
Here is the URL to which I connected to and received the Adobe 6 update
TODAY...(THX to Roman)Eddie Wiseman
- Original Message -
From: "Roman Kielich" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 2:21 AM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: PS v.6.01
At 16:59
Do you mean you installed the updater yesterday, then ran it again today?
If you wouldn't mind giving me more info on exactly what you did, I'd
appreciate it.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Edward Wiseman
Sent: Tuesday, February 27,
I downloaded the Photoshop 6.01 updater yesterday. No problems.
It's a self expanding archive. Once expanded, it includes a readme file
that explains what the fixes are. You can read that before you install
the update. Then you run the setup.exe to install.
It all worked fine. Guess I was
I've installed it but have no idea what it does.
Ray Amos
Following is from a post on the Photoshop usenet news group:
The most significant fixes in the 6.0.1 release include:
- The painting tool brush picker has new usability improvements including:
- Enter brings up and dismisses the
At 8:44 AM -0600 2/27/01, Marvin Demuth wrote:
As I prepare for scanning for these size prints, it will help me, and I
suspect others, if some of you scanning for quality 8.5 x 11 and 13 x 17
prints from 35mm in either b w or color will comment on:
1. The typical file sizes you use at the
Me too... everything went fine till then, then it gave me the error and aborted
the install.. My PS says 6.01 though...
Mike M.
Austin Franklin wrote:
Has anyone had any errors when installing this? I got a "ComponentMoveData"
error #-115.
shAf previously wrote ...
Marvin writes ...
..., I found that the file sizes were about
5MB, the print sizes were about 5 x 7
and the ppi were 385.
Whereas I thought this photographer's prints would
provide an example of the math, it doesn't work.
1st ...
2nd ...
Michael writes ...
Me too... everything went fine till then, then it gave me
the error and aborted the install.. My PS says 6.01 though...
Mike M.
Austin Franklin wrote:
Has anyone had any errors when installing this? I got a
"ComponentMoveData" error #-115.
My 6.01 install
shAf wrote:
...
However, the math does not agree with the filesize you mention!!
(5" X 385ppi) X (7" X 385ppi) X 3 RGB channels is not equal to 5Mb!!
... more rather, ~15Mb (no wonder you are confused???)
shAf :o)
I checked a specific file and came up with this data:
2794 x
Roger,
If your OS is Win95/98/Me/2000 I suggest you try a program called Qimage
Pro. You don't have to resample for printing as the program does it for you.
The print results are far superior than PS or PSP. The program is very
inexpensive and the support is very good.
You can get a trial
If your OS is Win95/98/Me/2000 I suggest you try a program called Qimage
Pro. You don't have to resample for printing as the program does
it for you.
The print results are far superior than PS or PSP. The program is very
inexpensive and the support is very good.
What, exactly, do you mean
Essentially yes. Read up on it all at http://www.scantips.com/
Maris
- Original Message -
From: "Marvin Demuth" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 1:44 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: File sizes, file formats, etc. for printing 8.5 x
11and 13 x 17...
Marvin writes ...
It is interesting that VuePrint Pro_32 refers to 385 dpi
rather than ppi.
In scanning and printing terminology can we use the terms
dpi and ppi interchangeably?
It is common to see both terms of resolution used as if they are
interchangeable, but if you consider
It is common to see both terms of resolution used as if they are
interchangeable, but if you consider (for example) Epson printers
which have a inkjet resolution of 720DPI, but should be sent an image
file of 240PPI, you can see where the context of the terminology is
important.
From my experience I find the prints are far superior than what PS produces.
You have full color management (ICC) support. The algorithms used in QP are
better than the resampling in PS. In PS or PSP you have to manually resample
prior to printing. In QP when setup the don't have to resample , if
Austin writes ...
Why do you believe dithering has anything to do with the
distinction of ppi vs dpi?
Impact printers were spec'd in dpi, as well as my laser
printers
Impact printers, laser printers, ink jet printers ... any printer
which needs to dither some sort of CYMk
Visited the UK FOI 2001 at the NEC Birmingham yesterday and had a shufty at
the above scanner in demo mode.
A single and 16x sampling image showed a distinct contrast change with the
single sample being the better gradation. However it has to be said that no
noise was visible at 300% on the 16
Impact printers, laser printers, ink jet printers ... any printer
which needs to dither some sort of CYMk pattern for creating
"apparent" colors have a DPI resolution specification which should be
considered separate from the RGB resolution you ask them to print
(PPI).
I understand your
On Mon, 26 Feb 2001 19:00:59 -0700 Berry Ives ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I did do the individual RGB adjustments to the best of my
abilities.
But in between my writing that response and mailing it, Ed seems to have
expanded Vuescan to work with your scanner and OS. Try it, see if it
Austin writes ...
Now, another question...why do you call it 'dither' instead of
halftone?
...
I consider "dither" as the general term, which includes
"halftone". "Halftone" would seem best applied to traditional
methods, and not include some of the newer techniques ... e.g.,
on 2/27/01 5:50 PM, Berry Ives at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on 2/26/01 9:47 PM, Doug Herr at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
At 06:17 PM 26/02/01 -0800, you wrote:
I did do the individual RGB adjustments to the best of my
abilities. It was fun seeing what could be done,
Bob Shomler wrote:
Following is from a post on the Photoshop usenet news group:
The most significant fixes in the 6.0.1 release include:
- The painting tool brush picker has new usability
improvements including:
Snip
- Memory usage behavior is better on all Windows OSes; the
But it's only better if you are resampling?
From my experience I find the prints are far superior than what
PS produces.
You have full color management (ICC) support. The algorithms used
in QP are
better than the resampling in PS. In PS or PSP you have to
manually resample
prior to
Half-toning is a specific kind of dithering, namely cluster-dot ordered
dithering. Another kind of dithering is a random dither, or stochastic
dithering. So the general term is dithering, not half-toning. You can read
about this in sec. 13.1.2 in Foley and van Dam's classic book, "Computer
Austin writes ...
I consider "dither" as the general term, which includes
"halftone". "Halftone" would seem best applied to traditional
methods, and not include some of the newer techniques ... e.g.,
"random" or "stoichastic" dithering ... but that may be just me
:o)
Well, I
FYI: A great book on PShop (with section on filmscanning) for photographers... it
particularly addresses the problems with balancing color from a practical
standpoint... is Photoshop 5 5.5 Artistry, by Barry Haynes and Wendy Crumpler,
published by New Riders, costs about $50 US and worth every
"Halftoning" really has nothing to do with digital imaging ...
I completely disagree. Halftone is a process, and is implementation
independent.
But in the context of consumer, and pro-sumer inkjet
printing, halftoning is not the process used, rather a mixture of
finer dots ... dots as
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 15:17:24 +1030 Mark Thomas ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
Is this really true? I have encountered images where playing with RGB
curves has just made me feel like I am drowning (perhaps just in my
personal pool of insufficient knowledge!)
It's not easy, but it does get
My understanding is different. Halftoning is not dithering, but you can use
dithering IN the halftone process. Halftone describes a process...as I said
in another post. Dithering is a 'function'. I will check out your
reference, and perhaps that reference is the source of the confusion.
The
FYI, check these books out:
Digital Color Halftoning (Spie/IEEE Series)
by Henry R. Kang
Editorial Reviews
Book News, Inc.
Aimed primarily at technical professionals in the field of digital color
imaging, the book explains the halftone process and how to design halftone
screens and screenless
Austin writes ...
"Halftoning" really has nothing to do with digital imaging ...
I completely disagree. Halftone is a process, and is implementation
independent.
...
I only separate "halftoning" and "dithering" chronologically
(traditionally), as in "halftone" is the original
41 matches
Mail list logo
