Message-ID: <6405822a@news.ausics.net> From: Computer Nerd Kev Subject: Re: Dumb Pinter Question Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc References: <9FKdnSx-aYhJ5pz5nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <-MKdnaGEcp-jap75nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com> <17ydnXi6-MG65Zj5nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@earthlink.com> User-Agent: tin/2.0.1-20111224 ("Achenvoir") (UNIX) (Linux/2.4.31 (i686)) NNTP-Posting-Host: news.ausics.net Date: 6 Mar 2023 16:03:23 +1000 Organization: Ausics - https://www.ausics.net Lines: 29 X-Complaints: abuse@ausics.net Path: csiph.com!news.bbs.nz!news.ausics.net!not-for-mail Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:37435 28B.I874 <28B.I874@noabzba.net> wrote: > Ummm ... larger-format paper IS an issue. Most semi-cheap > lasers and all-in-ones, (I know HP) can feed 'legal' > paper. 11x17 and above .... well ... separate large-format > scanner + large-format printer. That's $$$ no matter how > you do it. Anything wider than 11" and you'll likely need > to take a stick to a print shop - or spend kilobucks on > like a huge 'office' Kyocera laser. I just do multiple scans and stitch the images together manually. Or I use a digital camera, and say I'll get around to fixing the lens distortion in software one day... I do have a digital A3 scanner on top of a broken photocopier/office-printer, but of course the software refuses to work if the printer part doesn't pass its self-test. > I saw a sort of 'inkjet' at an archetect's ... it looked > like a long rectangle. You put BIG sheets of paper, like > 48"x48", into it one sheet at a time and it pulled it > past the printhead(s?). I rather doubt it was cheap. They're ink-jets, newer models often use UV-curable ink. Once the cartridges go out of production those large format printer models go from expensive to cheap extremely quickly. -- __ __ #_ < |\| |< _#