Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: Lisa Nikodym on October 24, 2007, 09:48:53 pm
-
After months of printing OK from CS3 (to an Epson 3800), a mysterious problem has developed. As soon as I click on "Print", it comes back with an error window saying, "Before you can perform printer-related tasks such a page setup or printing a document, you need to install a printer." It doesn't get far enough for me to choose a printer from the list. However, the printer *is* installed, and I can print to it fine using other applications.
I've googled (and searched Adobe forums) for answers, and have only found more people with the same problem without any useful-sounding answers. Has anyone here run into this problem, or have any understanding about what is needed to fix it? I've already tried uninstalling and reinstalling the printer, and it hasn't helped.
Thanks,
Lisa
-
After months of printing OK from CS3 (to an Epson 3800), a mysterious problem has developed. As soon as I click on "Print", it comes back with an error window saying, "Before you can perform printer-related tasks such a page setup or printing a document, you need to install a printer." It doesn't get far enough for me to choose a printer from the list. However, the printer *is* installed, and I can print to it fine using other applications.
I've googled (and searched Adobe forums) for answers, and have only found more people with the same problem without any useful-sounding answers. Has anyone here run into this problem, or have any understanding about what is needed to fix it? I've already tried uninstalling and reinstalling the printer, and it hasn't helped.
Thanks,
Lisa
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=148514\")
Lisa,
You should submit a formal bug report to Adobe, filled as completely as you can. Here is the link: [a href=\"http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform]Adobe Bug Report Forim[/url]
Mark
-
I'll give that a try. Thanks for the link.
In the meantime, I'll just print from CS2.
Lisa
-
I'll give that a try. Thanks for the link.
In the meantime, I'll just print from CS2.
Lisa
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148844\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That is exactly what I am doing until the CS3 print module is fixed.
Mark
-
Have u tried to reinstall drivers?
-
Have u tried to reinstall drivers?
I believe we did when we uninstalled and reinstalled the printer.
Lisa
-
I had endless problems with CS3 printing regarding double profiles, poor centering, non-sticky settings, etc. and revived my old copy of Qimage. All the printing problems disappeared and many new capabilities appeared. I do all my printing through Qimage now. Highly recommended.
I think Adobe got too ambitious too soon with the printing module.
-
I believe we did when we uninstalled and reinstalled the printer.
Lisa
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149012\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You did. Installing and uninstalling the printer is installing and uninstalling the driver, the profiles and the utilities.
-
I had endless problems with CS3 printing regarding double profiles, poor centering, non-sticky settings, etc. and revived my old copy of Qimage. All the printing problems disappeared and many new capabilities appeared. I do all my printing through Qimage now. Highly recommended.
I think Adobe got too ambitious too soon with the printing module.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149013\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It isn't "endless". There are really two key problems: (1) a non-sticky setting for the printer selection and (2) centering. The centering problem exists with some combinations of O/S and printer/printer driver but not for others. It is a work in progress. Don't despair. Meanwhile, I am using CS2 for printing.
-
I had actually been successfully using CS3 printing for several months, with everything working well for me except for the setting non-stickiness. This problem of mine is a new one. Probably something got corrupted, or reset by some update, but I have no way of telling what. I'm content to use CS2 for printing until a new version of CS3 comes out, or until I need a new PC and need to reinstall CS3 anyway (which will probably be in not too long).
Lisa
-
You know, its really kind of sad. Stepping back from the details for a minute, we've got a company as big and talented as Adobe, doing what they've been doing for a long time, and they can't write a printing module that reliably does what it is supposed to do. Or maybe another way of saying it, they intro'd the software before their programmers solved the problem. None the less, really sad.
And this is not a $49.95 software package.
-
You know, its really kind of sad. Stepping back from the details for a minute, we've got a company as big and talented as Adobe, doing what they've been doing for a long time, and they can't write a printing module that reliably does what it is supposed to do. Or maybe another way of saying it, they intro'd the software before their programmers solved the problem. None the less, really sad.
And this is not a $49.95 software package.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149068\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I suspect the problem is not with Adobe, but rather with Microsoft. They have gotten big into DRM with Vista and are adding updates to XP to same. Since image files are subject to DRM, they might be creating conflicts (just ask anybody that has Vista and has tried to move files from one machine to another). Best advice is to print with a third-part printing program like Q-Image, or use CS2 as you're doing.
FWIW, my next box is a Mac.
Cheers,
-
Jack,
It so happens that using the Epson printer driver with a Mac is and always has been a far bigger headache than it recently turned out to be with CS3 on Windows. Three big actors are involved in how it all works or doesn't work together: Adobe, Epson and Microsoft. Once you reflect on the history and timing of up-grades between Photoshop, the Epson Driver and Microsoft Operating Systems, you can begin to put together a picture of where and how the problems sit. I recommend that you suspend your suspicions for a while.
Mark
-
I suspect the problem is not with Adobe, but rather with Microsoft. They have gotten big into DRM with Vista and are adding updates to XP to same. Since image files are subject to DRM, they might be creating conflicts (just ask anybody that has Vista and has tried to move files from one machine to another). Best advice is to print with a third-part printing program like Q-Image, or use CS2 as you're doing.
FWIW, my next box is a Mac.
Cheers,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149090\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is pure nonsense.
-
This is pure nonsense.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149117\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jeff, what is the distinction between pure nonsense and nonsense that is not pure ?
OK, I'm being facetious, but on a more serious side, this kind of response is not useful to any one. Either you know what's wrong with what Jack is saying or you don't. If the latter, discussion over, if the former, please educate us.
Mark
-
Microsoft doesn't just slap drm on anything going through. Either it the item's digital rights are managed or they are not. This is something someone creating a file has to setup.
-
I had a similar probem with Adobe Acrobat *Reader* of all things. Printing resulted in the "No Printer" message, even though several printers were available on my XP/SP2 Laptop.
The problem was very similar to ones I encounter managing terminal services, where User's profiles are locked down - however in my case (logged in locally - domain admin rights) i still encountered this problem:
Installed Adobe apps, at the time:
Acrobat 6.0 (full version able to author pdf's)
CS2
LR betas
LR 1.2
CS3 upg
Reader 8.02
Obviously, I'n not running LR beta, nor am I running CS2, but this is the order in which the apps lived and were superseded on this machine. I solved my problem by re-installing Acrobat 6. Printing is now fine, however opening pdf's in IE results in Acrobat 6 launching instead of Reader 8 despite a re-install.
This *feels* like an Adobe issue . . . .
-
This is pure nonsense.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149117\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree, that post on Windows Vista and DRM is utter nonsense. I'm sure his Mac will be the superhero and solve his ills.
-
Well, now we've migrated from pure nonsense to utter nonsense. What's the difference in the nonsense between "pure" and "utter"?
Again, you guys, if you want to accuse an experienced Forum member of "uttering" nonsense, you'd be more ingratiating and informative if you explained yourselves.
-
Lisa:
Try using XP's "restore" to get you back to a date where you could print directly. Confirm you can print from XP again, then run ONLY the XP udpates to get you current again and see if you can still print afterward. If you can, my suspicions were wrong. If you can't, I'll be looking a few apologies
PS: and now you know why I don't post here anymore...
PPS: For all you DRM naysayers, here's a little test for you to run --- move about 1Gig of images from your XP machine to a relatively fast external drive and record the total time it takes. Now put those same 1G of images on a Vista machine and time that move to the same external drive, even if the Vista machine is a faster box. Get back to us with your results.
-
Lisa:
Try using XP's "restore" to get you back to a date where you could print directly. Confirm you can print from XP again, then run ONLY the XP udpates to get you current again and see if you can still print afterward. If you can, my suspicions were wrong. If you can't, I'll be looking a few apologies
PS: and now you know why I don't post here anymore...
PPS: For all you DRM naysayers, here's a little test for you to run --- move about 1Gig of images from your XP machine to a relatively fast external drive and record the total time it takes. Now put those same 1G of images on a Vista machine and time that move to the same external drive, even if the Vista machine is a faster box. Get back to us with your results.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149241\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
What makes you think it is related to DRM?
There is a vista bug with moving large files. It will slow to a crawl. Even if you do it disk to disk. Should be fixed with a service pack.
-
Lisa:
PS: and now you know why I don't post here anymore...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149241\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jack, a person of your calibre and experience should have no qualms about posting in this community. Most of us I think are reasonable people - even if we don't necessarily always agree with what eachother says. Don't let a few intemperate remarks colour the whole experience and usefulness of dialoguing here.
-
Jack, a person of your calibre and experience should have no qualms about posting in this community...[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149272\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jack, I've noticed fewer posts from you and attributed it to your travel or business. It would be a great loss to us all if you didn't post here. Your experience and thoughtful insights are very welcome.
Fred
-
OK, if you want a more detailed response, here you go. The DRM added in Vista is targeted at content formats that actually support DRM, primarily video and audio (although I suppose there could be some image format out there that supports DRM). But the file formats in use 99% of photographers have no DRM built in and are handled no differently under Vista than previous operating systems, just like MP3's still work without DRM in Vista or any other OS despite the fact that some new audio formats have content protection (iTunes, anybody?).
Formats like JPG, TIFF, PSD etc have no DRM support built into the file format, so if you think DRM is somehow coming into play, I would very much like for you to try to explain what exactly you are suggesting that Vista is doing with these files?
As for your network file copy test, that doesn't prove anything about DRM. There has been speculation about the cause of these slowdowns, but I've not seen any actual proof and it's more likely that it has to do with the new status dialogs. Besides, you'll get the same results regardless for the format of the files. Are you suggesting that ALL files undergo DRM in Vista? Do you have any idea how DRM actually works?
Lets also keep in mind that this thread was about printing. Even if Vista were to somehow try to prevent printing of DRM-managed files (and again, the file formats we use are not DRM-managed), don't you think this would affect more than just CS3 if it's something the OS is doing? Why are people not having the same problem in CS2, or QImage?
Jack may have a lot of posts and be a great photographer, but that doesn't mean he knows anything about operating systems at the API level, so yes when I see such wild speculation offered with no proof to back it up, I'm going to call it nonsense.
-
Jack, I've noticed fewer posts from you and attributed it to your travel or business. It would be a great loss to us all if you didn't post here. Your experience and thoughtful insights are very welcome.
Fred
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149274\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jack,
I agree with Fred. You are definitely on the list of those I pay attention to on the LL forum. Please try to ignore the riff-raff; most of us are pretty civilized here.
Eric
-
Thanks Fred and thanks Eric. The unfortunate fact is the "culture" that used to exist here is gone --- or more accurately perhaps, it is now outnumbered...
~~~
What makes you think it is related to DRM?
There is a vista bug with moving large files. It will slow to a crawl. Even if you do it disk to disk. Should be fixed with a service pack.
Uh, yeah, it certianly will slow to a crawl when you try to move or delete ANY file, and the larger the files, the slower it goes... So what exactly do you all think "the bug" that causes that particular annoyance is? A little searching will reveal it is... oh surprise, DRM. Turns out "the bug" is that Vista looks inside every file - not just folders, but each FILE - for DRM.
~
-
Thanks Fred and thanks Eric. The unfortunate fact is the "culture" that used to exist here is gone --- or more accurately perhaps, it is now outnumbered...
The way I see it, the culture is still here, but there are a few strident voices that often drown out the gentler ones. That is unfortunate, but I try to ignore them for the most part.
Uh, yeah, it certianly will slow to a crawl when you try to move or delete ANY file, and the larger the files, the slower it goes... So what exactly do you all think "the bug" that causes that particular annoyance is? A little searching will reveal it is... oh surprise, DRM. Turns out "the bug" is that Vista looks inside every file - not just folders, but each FILE - for DRM.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149284\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I admit I'm no DRM expert, but your description sure sounds like the way I would expect Microsoft to implement it.
Eric
-
Uh, yeah, it certianly will slow to a crawl when you try to move or delete ANY file, and the larger the files, the slower it goes... So what exactly do you all think "the bug" that causes that particular annoyance is? A little searching will reveal it is... oh surprise, DRM. Turns out "the bug" is that Vista looks inside every file - not just folders, but each FILE - for DRM.
Please cite some solid technical sources (and speculation in slashdot comments does not count). This performance issue was with the shell, you could get around it by using a command prompt, which means if it was DRM it sure wasn't very effective.
And you still haven't explained how this supposed DRM could affect printing in CS3 but not CS2 or QImage.
-
Jack: Count me *in* as one of those who enjoy your contribution.
In regard to your DRM speculation, it's just that - one of the problems of Internet search I'm afraid, the mis-information comes up just a readily as the good stuff. *Saying* the DRM appears in a search means nothing . . .
Here's an excellant summary of what DRM and it's relationship to Windows Vista really is:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?m=200709 (http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?m=200709)
This is mainly in response to a "researcher" out of New Zealand, loudly proclaiming all sorts of ills caused by Vista DRM . . . to date, he has yet to actually run a copy of Vista!, some research, eh?
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html)
Note that this article has been continously updated since it's original post in December of 2006
I bring these links up, because I feel they are truly usefull and informative. If you personally don't *like* Vista, thats your call - but associating a side issue with a known and well documented filecopy issue is plain wrong. Here btw is Ms's response to the filecopy issue:
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=938979 (http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=938979)
I'm currently running a 32bit version of Vista SP1 beta and can report improved filecopy performance Here's a video showing side by side comparision:
http://www.istartedsomething.com/20070928/...sp1-comparison/ (http://www.istartedsomething.com/20070928/vista-file-copy-sp1-comparison/)
As an aside, I made some statements regarding RAID storage some time ago on this very forum - some of which were not always true, or unsubstantiated - I was called out on it, and happily owned up to it! *That* to me is the true spirit of a discussion forum
I'm sure you'll agree that *any* forum is best with a low "signal to noise" ratio, please take my comments as only that!
Regards - John