Uh huh. . .what is your driver version? How is your printer connected? What is the printer firmware #?
Ya see, you STILL have more work to do...
:~)
As I noted in my report, at least via the Ethernet driver I can't alter or change the Standard or Maximum settings in the paper tab. I'm only able to change the Centered check box. The others are greyed out.
As far as your Maximum finding, yes, this is as expected since I told you that by default the 4800 (and 7/9800) drivers have unequal margins. Top, left & right of .13" and the bottom of .56". So, at "Standard" you have the situation where the bottom margin DOES produce an offset. In the past (and on my config) selecting Centered in the driver SHOULD produce a centered image on the paper. On the Mac, we never had a "Centered" option in the driver, hense the requirement for creating custom margins in Page Setup.
BTW, did you measure your overall paper length? Is it undercut? I often find EPson papers to be just a tiny bit short (particularly watercolor papers). 3RD party papers seem to be all over the map.
This is what Dave said...
"On Win CS2, PS saved the current printer "application wide". On Mac, it depended on what your setting was for "Selected Printer in Print Dialog" in the Print & Fax System Preference. If you had a printer selected in there, your "last used" printer in PS would be different from the one you'd end up printing to (or you'd have to change it in the OS print dialog) and things could go wrong.
In CS3, we're transitioning to a "per-document settings" model, rather than "application wide", so on Windows, it picks up the printer from the system default. On Mac, it still picks up the printer from the OS preference."
With regards to printer margins, he said:
"There is a change from CS2 in how the margins were handled. In CS2 we automatically "minimized" the margins (we would basically try and slam the margins to 0). On printers like the Epson 2200, this meant we would get symmetric borders. In CS3 we do not do this margin minimization, but rather use the printer's default margins. In the 2200 this means that the user needs to click the "Centered" and/or "Minimize Margins" check boxes in the printer's "Page Layout" properties panel to get truly centered prints.
(The reason for this is that on Vista, the margins are, from an application's point of view, a read-only field, and simply slamming them to 0 as we did in CS2 causes problems.)"
So, the changes required for Photoshop CS3 were not just designed to piss people off...things change often because the HAVE to.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=116197\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jeff,
As far as the tests go, not sure what work I have still to do apart from seeing whether further experience confirms my results and to answer your questions. My driver version is 5.51. My firmware version is the one before last. Epson Pro-Graphics confirmed to me that given my set-up no functionality changes, so it is completely neutral whether I up-grade them or not. My philosophy about up-grading as you may expect from me - is quite simply not to bother unless it is to fix something important or to provide significant additional functionality.
My printer is connected with a USB cable to a USB2 port in the computer. Nothing fancy.
I would like to think that smart software and firmware should know about the unequal printable page dimensions and build-in the compensation accordingly. These dimensions have been standard Epson fare for as long back as I can remember and have almost never caused a problem in the past - at least on the succession of Windows O/S's I've been using. There was one episode when Epson issued a faulty up-grade of a 4000 driver which failed to center with matte paper - strange bug, which they fixed.
I usually print with Epson Enhanced Matte. The latest sheet I used this morning making these tests measures bang-on 8.5 * 11 inches, using a stainless steel ruler called "Bates National Rule" made by the Bates Mfg. Co, in Hackettstown N.J. 07840 U.S.A. Now does it get better than that? (OK, this ruler isn't certified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but for my purposes..............)
Thanks for getting the feedback from Dave.
As for their transitioning to "per document settings" from "application wide settings" - this makes it clear that it wasn't an accident, it was by design. I wish it were an accident, because then they would fix it. I retain my opinion that this is regression, but that's just me and who am I.
On the issue of the printer margins, he doesn't mention the X800 series or the O/S's concerned, so I'm not sure how to interpret that material. Anyhow, this may be becoming a moot point insofar as your work and mine have both indicated that there are functionally effective workarounds. Still, I think Adobe should issue a Tech Note as I suggested previously. Their documentation is poor on this, to put it mildly.
As for changing things to piss people off, of course this is a strawman - no-one in their right mind would expect them to want to do that. And of course, one needs to respect the fact they are frying more than one fish at a time when they're designing software hence it must get more complicated as options multiply. But I am confident they have the technical smarts to cater for these things and still preserve the outcome functionality that was good in the immediate previous version, perhaps in a different way, but good functionality nonetheless. I look forward to a a program up-date and material from Adobe that I hope would address some of this stuff. Meanwhile, I'll use CS2 for printing and Lightroom/CS3 for everything else. Keeps life easy.
