#PageSetter
3 messages in this thread
Todd, That's not necessairly true. For example, the screen is 640 pixels
wide, while lots of dot matrix printers are 980 pixels wide. They just
don't divide evenly. So even rounding off and saying the ratio between the
screen and the printer is 2 to 3, what do you do with a single pixel? Do
you print it as 1 pixel or 2 pixels? What about 3 pixels…do you print
them as 4 pixels or 5 pixels? Do you do a 1 to 1 dump? Then what about
the 1/3 of the printer width that isn't being used. I think the main thing
to be realized is that this isn't a photograph…it's computer generated
graphics and there is some difficulty translating screen pixels to print
pixels when the ratio between the 2 is not 1 to 1 or 1 to 2 where the
translation is easy. Don
You got it! There are a lot of factors involved, the worst of which is
that even if you specify somehow that your width is exactly right, the Dump
will still scale in an attempt to make the aspect right. The only right way
to do it (if you truly want a 1:1 representation) would be to write your
own dump.
I believe that the DumpRPort function takes the 980 pixel wide
figure only for figuring the maximum dump width. A printout very rarely
actually reaches this figure. Instead, the dpi figure is used which is
also in printertag.asm. I have noticed that an inch or two is missing from
the end of a dump in any case. Anyway, the basic idea is that yes, it is
necessary to rewrite the Dump — Sorry … the DumpRPort function … lost
my place … hold on a sec … ah, there we are. I'm finally learning
FILGE (Fully Impossible Literary Grossout Engine) … as the best solution
is to implement a mixture -i.e. since most graphics are more than 1 pixel
wide and let's say that it is better to add an anti-aliasing routine which
smooth's out the jaggies between pixels. If this were implemented, you
would still have the same 1 pixel = 2 dots (sometimes) = 3 dots (sometimes)
= 1 dot (somtimes) problem, although it should really be ei (2 or 3) or (1
or 2) but not both — (long weird sentance) — but as jagged pixels would
be smoothed out it wouldn't look quite as bad. And with a laser printer (or
other hires printer) it would be almost impossible to notice at all,
thereby leaving a clean and wonderfully beautiful screendump (now wouldn't
that be nice?).
Anyway, I'm still interested in any information regarding rewriting
the printer.device if anybody happens to have any info available.