Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.acorn.misc > #4377 > unrolled thread

Printer

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.acorn.misc

Contents

  Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-18 12:34 +0000
    Re: Printer Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-18 13:16 +0000
      Re: Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-18 16:11 +0000
        Re: Printer Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-18 17:26 +0000
          Re: Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-18 19:06 +0000
            Re: Printer Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-18 20:45 +0000
              Re: Printer Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-18 21:39 +0000
                Re: Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-19 06:21 +0000
                  Re: Printer Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-19 14:23 +0100
                  Re: Printer Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-19 14:15 +0000
                    Re: Printer Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-19 18:53 +0100
                      Re: Printer Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-22 14:12 +0000
                  Re: Printer Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-22 14:08 +0000
                Re: Printer Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-19 10:39 +0000
              Re: Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-19 05:47 +0000
            Re: Printer Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> - 2012-03-18 21:51 +0000
              Re: Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-19 05:42 +0000
          Re: Printer Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2012-03-19 12:58 +0000
            Re: Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-19 19:21 +0000
              Re: Printer Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2012-03-19 19:47 +0000
                Re: Printer Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-19 20:46 +0000
                Re: Printer Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-19 22:31 +0000
                  Re: Printer Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2012-03-20 11:32 +0000
                  Re: Printer Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-20 13:26 +0000
                    Re: Printer Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2012-03-20 16:20 +0100
                      Re: Printer Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-20 16:05 +0000
                      Printer Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-20 16:07 +0000
                      Re: Printer Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-20 17:29 +0000
              Re: Printer M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2012-03-19 20:17 +0000
                Re: Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-19 20:42 +0000
                  Re: Printer M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2012-03-19 21:37 +0000
                    Re: Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-20 07:08 +0000
                      Re: Printer M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2012-03-20 10:39 +0000
                  Re: Printer Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-20 13:14 +0000
                    Re: Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-20 19:07 +0000
                      Re: Printer Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-21 10:38 +0000
                        Re: Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-21 19:40 +0000
                          Re: Printer Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> - 2012-03-21 22:29 +0000
                          Re: Printer Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-22 17:13 +0000
                            Re: Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-22 19:01 +0000
                              Re: Printer Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-23 07:33 +0000
                            Re: Printer Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-22 20:34 +0000
                              Re: Printer Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2012-03-23 12:05 +0100
                            Re: Printer Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2012-03-23 12:08 +0100
                              Re: Printer Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2012-03-23 11:39 +0000
      Re: Printer John Tytgat <this@is.invalid> - 2012-03-20 01:10 +0100
        Re: Printer Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-20 11:05 +0000

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#4377 — Printer

Having sorted a bit of time, thought I'd have a look at this PS printing
some folks seem so enthusiastic about.

Obviously still using the HP LaserJet P2055dn

On RISC OS: 
Printers+ 1.91a using a PostScript level-2 driver via JetDirect.
Printing through this I can use the PC 210 x 297 paper size and the OvPro
documents print correctly.

Unfortunately. Shift + Select click, PostScript Configuration window
doesn't have any option to control the resolution, so it prints at max res
all the time (Very wasty on toner).

Win PC side:
Installed the HP Universal Printing PS driver.
Printing through this I can use the PC 210 x 297 paper size and the OvPro
documents print correctly.

Unfortunately, again this has very little in the way of user configuration
and also prints at max resolution all the time.

So it appears while PS is sound in principle, the reality is somewhat
different.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Dave

-- 

Dave Triffid

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#4378

In article <5272611ca3dave@triffid.co.uk>,
   Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> Unfortunately. Shift + Select click, PostScript Configuration
> window doesn't have any option to control the resolution, so it
> prints at max res all the time (Very wasty on toner).

... but postscript has no real conception of 'resolution' - it's all
controlled by the printer. Laser printers in general have a default
resolution determined by the laser engine, and not by the computer.
Remember, postscript is primarily a vector language (a bit like
draw), and not bitmap (like paint). Even when the page contains a
bitmap, it is converted to the laser engine resolution when printed.

-- 
Chris Johnson

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4384

In article <527264ff3fchrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net>,
   Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> wrote:
> In article <5272611ca3dave@triffid.co.uk>,
>    Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > Unfortunately. Shift + Select click, PostScript Configuration
> > window doesn't have any option to control the resolution, so it
> > prints at max res all the time (Very wasty on toner).

> ... but postscript has no real conception of 'resolution' - it's all
> controlled by the printer. Laser printers in general have a default
> resolution determined by the laser engine, and not by the computer.
> Remember, postscript is primarily a vector language (a bit like
> draw), and not bitmap (like paint). Even when the page contains a
> bitmap, it is converted to the laser engine resolution when printed.

I know nothing much about PS, what I do know is, no matter what resolution I
set in the Printer config interface app on the PC, even Economode, PS
still prints at max resolution.

Dave

-- 

Dave Triffid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4387

In article <5272750baadave@triffid.co.uk>,
   Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <527264ff3fchrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net>,
>    Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> wrote:
> > In article <5272611ca3dave@triffid.co.uk>,
> >    Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Unfortunately. Shift + Select click, PostScript Configuration
> > > window doesn't have any option to control the resolution, so it
> > > prints at max res all the time (Very wasty on toner).

> > ... but postscript has no real conception of 'resolution' - it's
> > all controlled by the printer. Laser printers in general have a
> > default resolution determined by the laser engine, and not by the
> > computer. Remember, postscript is primarily a vector language (a
> > bit like draw), and not bitmap (like paint). Even when the page
> > contains a bitmap, it is converted to the laser engine resolution
> > when printed.

> I know nothing much about PS, what I do know is, no matter what
> resolution I set in the Printer config interface app on the PC,
> even Economode, PS still prints at max resolution.

As I said above - PS has no concept of resolution - it prints at the
resolution of the laser engine (even if it may now be a LED or
whatever, rather than a true laser). It's all done by the cpu in the
printer. In the old days laser printers (eg Apple) used a fixed
resolution of 300 dpi. Modern ones probably are not very different,
maybe 600 now. You will not get the quoted resolutions of 1440 or
2880 of inkjet printers, which is why most consumer colour laser
printers cannot do photoreal printing as well.

-- 
Chris Johnson

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4392

In article <52727be2c4chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net>,
   Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> wrote:
> In article <5272750baadave@triffid.co.uk>,
>    Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article <527264ff3fchrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net>,
> >    Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> wrote:
> > > In article <5272611ca3dave@triffid.co.uk>,
> > >    Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > Unfortunately. Shift + Select click, PostScript Configuration
> > > > window doesn't have any option to control the resolution, so it
> > > > prints at max res all the time (Very wasty on toner).

> > > ... but postscript has no real conception of 'resolution' - it's
> > > all controlled by the printer. Laser printers in general have a
> > > default resolution determined by the laser engine, and not by the
> > > computer. Remember, postscript is primarily a vector language (a
> > > bit like draw), and not bitmap (like paint). Even when the page
> > > contains a bitmap, it is converted to the laser engine resolution
> > > when printed.

> > I know nothing much about PS, what I do know is, no matter what
> > resolution I set in the Printer config interface app on the PC,
> > even Economode, PS still prints at max resolution.

> As I said above - PS has no concept of resolution - it prints at the
> resolution of the laser engine (even if it may now be a LED or
> whatever, rather than a true laser). It's all done by the cpu in the
> printer. In the old days laser printers (eg Apple) used a fixed
> resolution of 300 dpi. Modern ones probably are not very different,
> maybe 600 now. You will not get the quoted resolutions of 1440 or
> 2880 of inkjet printers, which is why most consumer colour laser
> printers cannot do photoreal printing as well.

If you say so...I have no idea.

The bottom line is obvious, If I have no way of controlling the resolution
with a PS driver, then the PS driver is no use at all to us and I've been
wasting both my time and toner testing.

FWIW. Using, for example the RISC OS HP LaserJet driver I can configure
150, 300, and 600 dpi and the printer does print at the chosen res.

BTW. Max res of the printer is 1200.

Dave

-- 

Dave Triffid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4399

In article <52728509b7dave@triffid.co.uk>,
   Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> The bottom line is obvious, If I have no way of controlling the
> resolution with a PS driver, then the PS driver is no use at all to
> us and I've been wasting both my time and toner testing.

Not wishing to prolong this, but I am a little puzzled. What type of
documents are you printing that you wish to control the resolution? I
have a PS laser printer, and the thought of resolution has never
entered my head. Maybe its just having used laser printers at work
for 30 years or more.

-- 
Chris Johnson

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4405

In article <52728e1e81chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net>, Chris Johnson
<chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> wrote:
> In article <52728509b7dave@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
>    <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > The bottom line is obvious, If I have no way of controlling the
> > resolution with a PS driver, then the PS driver is no use at all to
> > us and I've been wasting both my time and toner testing.

> Not wishing to prolong this, but I am a little puzzled. What type of
> documents are you printing that you wish to control the resolution? I
> have a PS laser printer, and the thought of resolution has never
> entered my head. Maybe its just having used laser printers at work for
> 30 years or more.

Unless you use a toner-saving program to generate 'invisible holes' in
bitmaps, I am unconvinced that printing at lower resolutions saves toner.

A lower resolution of laser print will probably simply mean bigger dots
and 150, 300 and 600 will still print a black square over the same area.

How does this save toner?

The greatest benefits of printing photos with a colour laser is that you
can print on card which doesn't (can't) go soggy and stripey as inkjets
can plus, a jpeg is sent to the PS printer for its routines to handle. If
the gamma of the image is okay these often print very well and look
better than the same image in a Sprite - which is converted to zillions
of vector objects by the RISC OS printer drivers making files so big a PS
printer

-- 
Tim Hill of timil.com . . .
* supports TFT & shares in cheaper ethical telecoms http://tjrh.eu/phone
* has a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/
* accepts incoming email: substitute postmaster@ for tim@

... "No more be grieved at that which thou hast done" Sonnet 35

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4415

In article <527292fe12tim@invalid.org.uk>,
   Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
> In article <52728e1e81chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net>, Chris Johnson
> <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> wrote:
> > In article <52728509b7dave@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> >    <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > > The bottom line is obvious, If I have no way of controlling the
> > > resolution with a PS driver, then the PS driver is no use at all to
> > > us and I've been wasting both my time and toner testing.

> > Not wishing to prolong this, but I am a little puzzled. What type of
> > documents are you printing that you wish to control the resolution? I
> > have a PS laser printer, and the thought of resolution has never
> > entered my head. Maybe its just having used laser printers at work for
> > 30 years or more.

> Unless you use a toner-saving program to generate 'invisible holes' in
> bitmaps, I am unconvinced that printing at lower resolutions saves toner.

You carry on being unconvinced, and leave those of use doing it to see
what we do see with our peepers. (I use a watchmakers Loupe).

> A lower resolution of laser print will probably simply mean bigger dots
> and 150, 300 and 600 will still print a black square over the same area.

It doesn't work like that, the dots are the same size, but with the lower
resolutions there are less of them in a given area. (The figures kinda
give it away).

And no, if you print at anything less than max res you don't get a black
square, you get an increasingly greyer square, and if you use the drivers
Economode, you get a *very* light grey and spotty square.

> How does this save toner?

Really!

> The greatest benefits of printing photos with a colour laser is that you
> can print on card which doesn't (can't) go soggy and stripey as inkjets
> can plus, a jpeg is sent to the PS printer for its routines to handle. If
> the gamma of the image is okay these often print very well and look
> better than the same image in a Sprite - which is converted to zillions
> of vector objects by the RISC OS printer drivers making files so big a PS
> printer

I guess, if you have money to burn, then use your colour Laser, even for
B&W.

Our Laser is only ever used for B&W documents, so it would be a waste of
lolly using a colour Laser.
In the home office environment we have to keep control of the consumables.

Printing draft in lower res does save toner.

Dave

-- 

Dave Triffid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4433

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 06:21:50 +0000 (GMT), Dave Symes 
<dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:

> Printing draft in lower res does save toner.

I think it depends upon the printer. The old office laser used to 
print at 300dpi. El cheapo boss guy wanted to save money so we 
switched to 150dpi. I could tell right away it was fail - everything 
looked the same, only jaggier. And after three toner kits it turned 
out that we were using roughly the same amount for a worse output. A 
graphic at 150dpi will be the same size as, and use about as much ink 
on the paper, as one printed 300dpi.

Draft mode would have saved a lot of toner, but the output was pretty 
poor, and turned beautiful laser documents into something akin to the 
output of a thermal-roll fax machine.

In the end, we found a print intensity option buried away in the 
printer so we knocked that back a bit. Small change, but it shut him 
up.


Best wishes,

Rick.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4437

In article <5272c2db45dave@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
<dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <527292fe12tim@invalid.org.uk>, Tim Hill
> <tim@invalid.org.uk> wrote:

> > In article <52728e1e81chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net>,
> > Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> wrote:

> > > In article <52728509b7dave@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> > >    <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:

> > > > The bottom line is obvious, If I have no way of
> > > > controlling the resolution with a PS driver, then
> > > > the PS driver is no use at all to us and I've been
> > > > wasting both my time and toner testing.

> > > Not wishing to prolong this, but I am a little
> > > puzzled. What type of documents are you printing that
> > > you wish to control the resolution? I have a PS laser
> > > printer, and the thought of resolution has never
> > > entered my head. Maybe its just having used laser
> > > printers at work for 30 years or more.

> > Unless you use a toner-saving program to generate
> > 'invisible holes' in bitmaps, I am unconvinced that
> > printing at lower resolutions saves toner.

> You carry on being unconvinced, and leave those of use
> doing it to see what we do see with our peepers. (I use a
> watchmakers Loupe).

I run a now fairly old and worn HP2100 which I shall be
looking to replace with a machine with an ethernet interface
once the current toner cartridge gets low.

Under Windows there are a number of resolution options
Printer Properties / Advanced Options, but I am not sure
that they actually do anything.

I find printing using a USB to Parallel cable somewhat dodgy
at the best of times (and utterly frustrating at the worst),
and the larger the PoScript files the exponentially greater
the chance of things going wrong.

So I have tried reducing the resolution / switching to
Economode in an attempt to reduce the size of the PoScript
file, but the effect on the file size was zero. But maybe
Post Script just does not work that way.

As to reducing the cost of consumables, new paper is only
ever used for documents for customers. There is always
enough junk mail or old no longer needed documents, all
printed on just one side of the paper (and often good
quality paper) around that does perfectly well for
everything else.

-- 
Russell
http://www.russell-hafter-holidays.co.uk
Russell Hafter Holidays         E-mail to enquiries at our domain
Need a hotel? <http://www.hrs.com/?client=en__blue&customerId=416873103>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4443

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:15:45 +0000 (GMT), Russell Hafter News 
<see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> wrote:

> I find printing using a USB to Parallel cable somewhat dodgy
> at the best of times (and utterly frustrating at the worst),

Thankfully my dongle hooked to an Epson inkjet seems to work fairly 
well, but then it's a clunky slow printer. Something that can fly 
pulling data into a big wodge of memory, it might run the parallel 
port a little faster than the dongle can sensibly manage? Or 
borderline?

Side note: My old PtrIIC DLL (parallel to IIC) used to rely upon the 
parallel hardware (strobe? I forget...) doing an automatic 4.7uS 
delay.  Newer parallel hardware (you know, when you had such things) 
cut down the delay length to around 3uS so the IIC was "iffy". I 
cured this by doing each write twice; though I do wonder if it would 
cause problems with stuff like an old fx80...


> Economode in an attempt to reduce the size of the PoScript
> file, but the effect on the file size was zero. But maybe
> Post Script just does not work that way.

No, PS is a description language. It's the printer that works out the 
resolution and level of ink *unless* you set everything to be printed 
as a bitmap...but that would be like turning an expensive PostScript 
into a fancy LaserJet...


Best wishes,

Rick.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4523

In article <almarsoft.3580428065469997496@news.orange.fr>, Rick Murray
<heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> like turning an expensive PostScript into a fancy LaserJet...

That's not difficult, my HP Laserjet /is/ a Postscript printer. But why
go sending it massive bitmaps when you don't need to? Oh, so you can
print bypassing the PS engine and print holes to save toner.

They why buy a PS printer?

:-/

-- 
Tim Hill of timil.com . . .
* supports TFT & shares in cheaper ethical telecoms http://tjrh.eu/phone
* has a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/
* accepts incoming email: substitute postmaster@ for tim@

... "For where thou art, there is the world itself, and where though art not, desolation" Henry VI, Act iii, Sc.2

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4522

In article <5272c2db45dave@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
<dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <527292fe12tim@invalid.org.uk>, Tim Hill
>    <tim@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
> > In article <52728e1e81chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net>, Chris Johnson
> > <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> wrote:
> > > In article <52728509b7dave@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> > >    <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > The bottom line is obvious, If I have no way of controlling the
> > > > resolution with a PS driver, then the PS driver is no use at all
> > > > to us and I've been wasting both my time and toner testing.

Look: PS x 2

> > > Not wishing to prolong this, but I am a little puzzled. What type
> > > of documents are you printing that you wish to control the
> > > resolution? I have a PS laser printer, and the thought of
> > > resolution has never entered my head. Maybe its just having used
> > > laser printers at work for 30 years or more.

Look: PS

> > Unless you use a toner-saving program to generate 'invisible holes'
> > in bitmaps, I am unconvinced that printing at lower resolutions saves
> > toner.

> You carry on being unconvinced, 

[Snip]

You're right. I am unconvinced that a POSTSCRIPT printer works like this:
if you are generating bitmap prints, I doubt you using the Postscript
engine where a black square is a black square no matter what the
resolution and, as pointed out elsewhere, the output just gets jaggier
and uses just as much toner.

I didn't just imagine all this I have had postscript printers since they
cost £2,500 and weighed about a ton.

-- 
Tim Hill of timil.com . . .
* supports TFT & shares in cheaper ethical telecoms http://tjrh.eu/phone
* has a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/
* accepts incoming email: substitute postmaster@ for tim@

... "They that have the power to hurt, and will do none; they rightly do inherit heaven's graces" Sonnet 94

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4422

In article <527292fe12tim@invalid.org.uk>, Tim Hill
<URL:mailto:tim@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
> In article <52728e1e81chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net>, Chris Johnson
> <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> wrote:
> > In article <52728509b7dave@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes
> >    <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > > The bottom line is obvious, If I have no way of controlling the
> > > resolution with a PS driver, then the PS driver is no use at all to
> > > us and I've been wasting both my time and toner testing.
> 
> > Not wishing to prolong this, but I am a little puzzled. What type of
> > documents are you printing that you wish to control the resolution? I
> > have a PS laser printer, and the thought of resolution has never
> > entered my head. Maybe its just having used laser printers at work for
> > 30 years or more.
> 
> Unless you use a toner-saving program to generate 'invisible holes' in
> bitmaps, I am unconvinced that printing at lower resolutions saves toner.

Lower resolution has no toner saving effect but many printers over an
EconoMode which can omit one in two or three 'dots' yes the output will be
greyish but it can be useful, say for drafts/file copies (I try and avoid
printing 'file copies' which is much more economical/environmentally friendly).
 
> A lower resolution of laser print will probably simply mean bigger dots
> and 150, 300 and 600 will still print a black square over the same area.
> 
> How does this save toner?
> 
> The greatest benefits of printing photos with a colour laser is that you
> can print on card which doesn't (can't) go soggy and stripey as inkjets
> can plus, a jpeg is sent to the PS printer for its routines to handle. If
> the gamma of the image is okay these often print very well and look
> better than the same image in a Sprite - which is converted to zillions
> of vector objects by the RISC OS printer drivers making files so big a PS
> printer
> 


Chris Evans

-- 
CJE Micro's / 4D                'RISC OS Specialists'
Telephone: 01903 523222             Fax: 01903 523679
chris@cjemicros.co.uk     http://www.cjemicros.co.uk/
78 Brighton Road, Worthing, West Sussex,     BN11 2EN
The most beautiful thing anyone can wear, is a smile!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4414

In article <52728e1e81chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net>,
   Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> wrote:
> In article <52728509b7dave@triffid.co.uk>,
>    Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > The bottom line is obvious, If I have no way of controlling the
> > resolution with a PS driver, then the PS driver is no use at all to
> > us and I've been wasting both my time and toner testing.

> Not wishing to prolong this, but I am a little puzzled. What type of
> documents are you printing that you wish to control the resolution? I
> have a PS laser printer, and the thought of resolution has never
> entered my head. Maybe its just having used laser printers at work
> for 30 years or more.

There's your problem. "..at work"

Someone else is paying for the printing medium, paper or toner.

Here, we need to print a lot of draft materials before consigning it to
full res printouts.

In a home office environment consumables need to be controlled otherwise...

Thanks
Dave

-- 

Dave Triffid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4407

In message <52728509b7dave@triffid.co.uk>
          Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:

> The bottom line is obvious, If I have no way of controlling the resolution
> with a PS driver, then the PS driver is no use at all to us and I've been
> wasting both my time and toner testing.

The bottom line may be obvious to you, but I certainly don't understand.
Why do you wish to control the resolution of a Postscript printout?

Dave

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4413

In article <9b1b947252.davehigton@dsl.pipex.com>,
   Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
> In message <52728509b7dave@triffid.co.uk>
>           Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:

> > The bottom line is obvious, If I have no way of controlling the
> > resolution with a PS driver, then the PS driver is no use at all to us
> > and I've been wasting both my time and toner testing.

> The bottom line may be obvious to you, but I certainly don't understand.
> Why do you wish to control the resolution of a Postscript printout?

> Dave

As previously noted, I know nothing about PS anything, so when it was
suggested by some as the solution to a *now* non existent problem... I'm
game for a go.

I assumed, being a printer driver, driving a modern printer, it would have
some of the usual configs.

It doesn't...

Thanks
Dave

-- 

Dave Triffid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4429

In article <52727be2c4chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net>,
   Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> wrote:
> In article <5272750baadave@triffid.co.uk>,
>    Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article <527264ff3fchrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net>,
> >    Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> wrote:
> > > In article <5272611ca3dave@triffid.co.uk>,
> > >    Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > Unfortunately. Shift + Select click, PostScript Configuration
> > > > window doesn't have any option to control the resolution, so it
> > > > prints at max res all the time (Very wasty on toner).

[Snip]

> As I said above - PS has no concept of resolution - it prints at the
> resolution of the laser engine (even if it may now be a LED or
> whatever, rather than a true laser). It's all done by the cpu in the
> printer. In the old days laser printers (eg Apple) used a fixed
> resolution of 300 dpi. Modern ones probably are not very different,
> maybe 600 now. You will not get the quoted resolutions of 1440 or
> 2880 of inkjet printers, which is why most consumer colour laser
> printers cannot do photoreal printing as well.

My ageing Kyocera FS-3750 can be set to print at resolutions of 300, 600,
1200 dpi.  There may be other possibilities, 150dpi,  but without hunting
out the old manual I can't remember.

At some point in the past I set it to 1200dpi and just left it there. 
Doesn't seem to use significantly more toner than 600dpi but I don't print
large areas of solid black!  I did use it at lower resolutions, maybe that
150dpi was possible, when I needed to make hard-copy for offset-litho
purposes as the lower dpi count was vital to stop the offset printed images
being too contrasty. or blocking-up.

It may be that Dave's printer is only capable of printing at one resolution
so maybe he needs to look for an old Kyocera!

Cheers

Alan

-- 
Alan Calder, Milton Keynes, UK.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4446

In article <5272e736cfalan_calder@o2.co.uk>,
   Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> wrote:
[Snippy]

> It may be that Dave's printer is only capable of printing at one
> resolution so maybe he needs to look for an old Kyocera!

> Cheers
> Alan

Nope, it's capable of printing at 3 resolutions, and if using a HP LJ
driver, it does 5 plus Economode, which according to the official manual
does use LESS toner.

Blimey, even with ancient RO Printers & Drivers it can do 3 resolutions.

The only turd in the fan is attempting to use the PS drivers, either RO or
HP, and that results in an identical print resolution for everything,
which could be anything, I have no idea, but it's certainly not in a save
toner mode of any sort.

Why am I continuing this conversation when I know from my own empirical
evidence that lowering the print res does use less toner.

D.

FWIW: Max res is 1200 x 1200 and a faster version of that is 1200 x 600

D.

-- 

Dave Triffid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4447

In article <52730a345adave@triffid.co.uk>, Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk>
wrote:
> In article <5272e736cfalan_calder@o2.co.uk>, Alan Calder
> <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> wrote: [Snippy]

> > It may be that Dave's printer is only capable of printing at one
> > resolution so maybe he needs to look for an old Kyocera!

> Nope, it's capable of printing at 3 resolutions, and if using a HP LJ
> driver, it does 5 plus Economode, which according to the official manual
> does use LESS toner.

> Blimey, even with ancient RO Printers & Drivers it can do 3 resolutions.

As can my old Kyocera, I just have to set the necessary resolution on the
printer.  Maybe your HP is just a pig to change the resolution?  Doddle on
the Kyo.

> The only turd in the fan is attempting to use the PS drivers, either RO
> or HP, and that results in an identical print resolution for everything,
> which could be anything, I have no idea, but it's certainly not in a
> save toner mode of any sort.

Doesn't the HP tell you what resolution it's using?  The Kyo states it on
the printer's little info panel.

> Why am I continuing this conversation when I know from my own empirical
> evidence that lowering the print res does use less toner.

Fair enough, a 300dpi mode might well use less toner than 1200dpi but in
text printing I'd have thought the difference would be very small.  Of
course, if you are doing massive amounts of printing then that might add up
to real money but my current toner cartridge has been in there for a couple
of years at least and shows no signs of failure yet.  I probably don't use
more than a couple of thousand sheets of A4 a year nowadays.

My main delight in using the Kyo as a PS printer is the sheer speed at
which I get control of the computer back from the printer. Memory heavy
print jobs seemed to take ages when the Acorn drivers were used, in PS mode
it takes seconds at most.

Alan

-- 
Alan Calder, Milton Keynes, UK.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.acorn.misc

csiph-web