Whenever I photocopy a pattern I will lay one on top of the other and hold
it up to the light, that way I can see if they are identical or different in
some way
The first good bedfordshire piece was terrible trying to match 4 copies
together to get a full square, but they were very early days
If the 'original' is already a copy (you wouldn't want to prick through
the pages of a book)
made with a copier which distorts slightly then any further copies, no
matter how accurate they may be, will remain distorted. Especially
relevant for BL patterns which are L shaped for a corner. One
Many thanks for all your help in resizing the pricking for the Binche
workshop at Sweet Briar. Didn't get around to it until today because Friday
was our anniversary and Saturday the Enchanted Lacemakers demonstrated at
the New Mexico Arts and Crafts Fair (around 200 juried artists, a major
Hi Jacqui
Sorry, I don't know an answer to your question, but I think that linear
enlargement/reduction is more usual nowadays, though I do remember
having it the other way around in the past
'Linear' enlargement/reduction on a photocopier seems to be pretty
standard.
141% enlargement is
So the safest thing to do is to measure after the enlargement and see if
you've got what you were expecting, rather than believing that just because you
asked for 200%, that's what you've got.
Jacquie
-
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line:
unsubscribe lace
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Brenda
Paternoster [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Conclusion - Photoshop Elements2 on my system enlarges/reduces in the
same way as photiocopers, ie by length, not by area.
Brenda
As a matter of interest, is there any way to tell at a glance which
sort of
.
Carol - in Suffolk UK
- Original Message -
From: Jane Partridge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: lace@arachne.com
Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2007 3:08 PM
Subject: [lace] Re: resizing a pricking
-
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line:
unsubscribe
Hello Carol
I remember, from years ago, a photocopy machine engineer telling us
that the internal settings of the machine were such that a narrow
margin was allowed for - in case the original wasn't *exactly* in the
right position, and that caused the copy to be not quite true, ie a
square
On Jun 23, 2007, at 12:28, Carol Adkinson wrote:
I bought an Elizabeth Burgess pattern - a round mat - very recently,
and it had just one-third of the pattern on the sheet - it had to be
photocopied three times, and the bits stuck together, to make the
pricking. The scanning and copying was
From: Carol Adkinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pricking.The scanning and copying was easy, but the fitting
together was
most definitely not, as I think the copying distorted the pricking
- only
very slightly, but enough to be a nuisance when putting the three
peices
together!
For
Hi Tamara
I think you've explained it better than I did - so long as it's a
linear enlargement and not an area one.
Brenda
On 21 Jun 2007, at 19:11, Tamara P Duvall wrote:
On Jun 21, 2007, at 13:25, Beth Stoll wrote:
the pricking is sized for 140/2 egyptian
cotton. I would prefer to use
Hi Brenda
As a matter of interest, is there any way to tell at a glance which sort of
enlargement any particular photocopier does?
Am I reading your post right to think that if I enlarge directly through the
photocopy facility of my scanner it will be linear, but if I scan it first
then use
On Jun 21, 2007, at 13:25, Beth Stoll wrote:
the pricking is sized for 140/2 egyptian
cotton. I would prefer to use 70/2,
According to Brenda Paternoster's Threads for Lace (a must-have book
for anyone making lace and liking to fiddle around with thread
replacements):
Egyptian Cotton
13 matches
Mail list logo
