Further bollocks from Canon

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I had another reply from the idiots at Canon about an hour ago: -

"Thank you for your recent enquiry regarding your Canon product. Canon
bubblejet printers are not designed to print card stock. It is not a fault,
it is simply due to the design of the printers. We hope this information is
of use to you."

OK, thought I, may be I am wrong (unlikely) I'll do some searching and see
what I can find. First stop, the manuals. This is what the manuals state: -

i9950
--------
Plain paper from 64-105g/m²
Speciality paper up to 270g/m²

iP8500
----------
Plain paper from 64-105g/m²
Speciality paper up to 273g/m²

OK, I'm all well and good there (the media I was using was 185g/m² and
210g/m² respectively). I then found the following brochures on the Canon
Europe site: -

i9950
--------
http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/pdfs/Bubble_Jet_i9950-p7671-c3848-UK-1098100911.pdf

iP8500
---------
http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/pdfs/PIXMA_iP8500-p7939-c3848-UK-1098101022.pdf

Again stating that both units are capable of printing on stock up to 270g/m²
(273g/m² for the iP8500). It would appear that Canon do not know the
specifications of their own printers! I have sent them a rather exasperated
reply back.


Here it is in full: -

Please refer to incident number 1925551. It would appear that you do not
know the technical specifications of your own printers! Let me spell them
out to you: -

i9950
--------
Plain paper from 64-105g/m²
Speciality paper up to 270g/m²

iP8500
----------
Plain paper from 64-105g/m²
Speciality paper up to 273g/m²

These specifications are taken from the manuals that accompanied both units.
The "cardstock" (as you call it) I am using is 185g/m² and 210g/m²
respectively. You claim that both units will print on media up to 270g/m².

I went into town today and I purchased some of your own brand Photo Paper
Plus Glossy which has a weight of 270g/m², much heavier than the media I was
using, but still usable in my units as the manuals (and brochures) state. I
printed the same project to each printer and got exactly the same results as
with the lighter media. In all I have attempted to print the project on the
following Canon brand media: -

LC-301
HR-101N
GP-401
PP-101


All with the same (predictable) result - slippage by between 1 and 2mm.

Suggest you educate yourself about the units in question before telling the
customer that they "cannot print on cardstock".

The more I converse with you, the more it becomes evident that you do not
know anything about your products. Both units are more than capable of
printing on stock up to 270g/m² as it states both ON YOUR WEBSITE and IN THE
MANUALS.
For your convenience, I have taken the liberty of including links to the
relevant product brochures.

i9950
--------
http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/pdfs/Bubble_Jet_i9950-p7671-c3848-UK-1098100911.pdf

iP8500
---------
http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/pdfs/PIXMA_iP8500-p7939-c3848-UK-1098101022.pdf

Suggest you read them and inwardly digest the contents. If what you say is
true, your website, the brochures and the product manuals are all lying. Is
that what you are claiming? If that is the case it would appear that you are
attempting to deliberately mislead the customer. Is that the case? It does
not, however, explain why the same projects printed on much lighter media
would give the same results. The fact that the driver and/or feed mechanism
is inherently faulty and has been for years is a much better explanation. I
will get you to admit liability if it kills me (and, at this rate, it
probably will!)

You're going to have to come up with a better explanation than that. I have
all the time in the world and I WILL persuade you to admit liability that
either the driver or feed mechanism in all your models, going back as far as
the 'S' series are faulty.

What do you have to say to that?

Maybe I shouldn't have accused them of lying but, right now I am just so
exasperated that they can even make such statement that the customer can
easily disprove and class as them being fobbed off.

It's a damned good thing that Canon 'support' rep wasn't in this room or I'd
probably have decked him!

 

[zakezuke]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Miss Perspicacia Tick wrote:
> I had another reply from the idiots at Canon about an hour ago: -
>
> "Thank you for your recent enquiry regarding your Canon product. Canon
> bubblejet printers are not designed to print card stock. It is not a fault,
> it is simply due to the design of the printers. We hope this information is
> of use to you."
>
> OK, thought I, may be I am wrong (unlikely) I'll do some searching and see
> what I can find. First stop, the manuals. This is what the manuals state: -


I'd like to reproduce your error... can you explain to me in step by
step detail including the software you are using to do the.. what I
assume is greeting cards?


I find it so amazing that a function that would seem to be within the
target market of the product be screwy.

 

[BURT]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Miss Perspicacia Tick" <test@test.com> wrote in message
news:jZzwe.142$DN.84@fe01.ams...
>I had another reply from the idiots at Canon about an hour ago: -
>
> "Thank you for your recent enquiry regarding your Canon product. Canon
> bubblejet printers are not designed to print card stock. It is not a
> fault, it is simply due to the design of the printers. We hope this
> information is of use to you."

Miss Tick (Mystic?), Your question was apples and their reply was oranges.
You are concerned about the placement of the image on the page and they are
answering about cardstock weight and feed issues. They still don't get it!
Am I correct that you wish to create a print that was borderless on three
sides and the fourth side would be aligned exactly with the place you were
going to fold it? The difference between the Epson and the Canon image
placement may have something to do with how the drivers adjusts the image to
avoid leaving a white margin at any border when doing a borderless print.
I am not an apologist for Canon. I have used Epson and Canon printers. I
don't think it has to do with paper slippage in the feed mechanism. For the
particular project you originally wrote about, why not recognize the
idiosyncracy of the printer and move the image slightly toward the fold in
your image software prior to printing? As I mentioned, I use Photoshop
Elements 2. I first set up a letter sized blank page, set the grid and
ruler to on, copy the image to the blank page, adjust its size and position,
and print. Worked for me.

I don't blame you for being upset with customer or tech service reps who
don't know their product and give poor advice. In this case, although they
are wrong, you can certainly do a simple "work-around" and solve the
problem.


>
> OK, thought I, may be I am wrong (unlikely) I'll do some searching and see
> what I can find. First stop, the manuals. This is what the manuals
> state: -
>
> i9950
> --------
> Plain paper from 64-105g/m²
> Speciality paper up to 270g/m²
>
> iP8500
> ----------
> Plain paper from 64-105g/m²
> Speciality paper up to 273g/m²
>
> OK, I'm all well and good there (the media I was using was 185g/m² and
> 210g/m² respectively). I then found the following brochures on the Canon
> Europe site: -
>
> i9950
> --------
> http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/pdfs/Bubble_Jet_i9950-p7671-c3848-UK-1098100911.pdf
>
> iP8500
> ---------
> http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/pdfs/PIXMA_iP8500-p7939-c3848-UK-1098101022.pdf
>
> Again stating that both units are capable of printing on stock up to
> 270g/m² (273g/m² for the iP8500). It would appear that Canon do not know
> the specifications of their own printers! I have sent them a rather
> exasperated reply back.
>
>
> Here it is in full: -
>
> Please refer to incident number 1925551. It would appear that you do not
> know the technical specifications of your own printers! Let me spell them
> out to you: -
>
> i9950
> --------
> Plain paper from 64-105g/m²
> Speciality paper up to 270g/m²
>
> iP8500
> ----------
> Plain paper from 64-105g/m²
> Speciality paper up to 273g/m²
>
> These specifications are taken from the manuals that accompanied both
> units. The "cardstock" (as you call it) I am using is 185g/m² and 210g/m²
> respectively. You claim that both units will print on media up to 270g/m².
>
> I went into town today and I purchased some of your own brand Photo Paper
> Plus Glossy which has a weight of 270g/m², much heavier than the media I
> was using, but still usable in my units as the manuals (and brochures)
> state. I printed the same project to each printer and got exactly the same
> results as with the lighter media. In all I have attempted to print the
> project on the following Canon brand media: -
>
> LC-301
> HR-101N
> GP-401
> PP-101
>
>
> All with the same (predictable) result - slippage by between 1 and 2mm.
>
> Suggest you educate yourself about the units in question before telling
> the customer that they "cannot print on cardstock".
>
> The more I converse with you, the more it becomes evident that you do not
> know anything about your products. Both units are more than capable of
> printing on stock up to 270g/m² as it states both ON YOUR WEBSITE and IN
> THE MANUALS.
> For your convenience, I have taken the liberty of including links to the
> relevant product brochures.
>
> i9950
> --------
> http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/pdfs/Bubble_Jet_i9950-p7671-c3848-UK-1098100911.pdf
>
> iP8500
> ---------
> http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/pdfs/PIXMA_iP8500-p7939-c3848-UK-1098101022.pdf
>
> Suggest you read them and inwardly digest the contents. If what you say is
> true, your website, the brochures and the product manuals are all lying.
> Is that what you are claiming? If that is the case it would appear that
> you are attempting to deliberately mislead the customer. Is that the case?
> It does not, however, explain why the same projects printed on much
> lighter media would give the same results. The fact that the driver and/or
> feed mechanism is inherently faulty and has been for years is a much
> better explanation. I will get you to admit liability if it kills me
> (and, at this rate, it probably will!)
>
> You're going to have to come up with a better explanation than that. I
> have all the time in the world and I WILL persuade you to admit liability
> that either the driver or feed mechanism in all your models, going back as
> far as the 'S' series are faulty.
>
> What do you have to say to that?
>
> Maybe I shouldn't have accused them of lying but, right now I am just so
> exasperated that they can even make such statement that the customer can
> easily disprove and class as them being fobbed off.
>
> It's a damned good thing that Canon 'support' rep wasn't in this room or
> I'd probably have decked him!
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:25:05 +0100, "Miss Perspicacia Tick"
<test@test.com> wrote:

>I had another reply from the idiots at Canon about an hour ago: -
>
>"Thank you for your recent enquiry regarding your Canon product. Canon
>bubblejet printers are not designed to print card stock. It is not a fault,
>it is simply due to the design of the printers. We hope this information is
>of use to you."
>
Yet more reasons why I never buy Canon printers. I have to be fair
and say I haven't had any such problem with the camera side of their
company, but the "consumer goods" side (which I see as everything
other than their Pro camera people) assumes that any inquiry is made
by an idiot; that as they are idiots any explanation will do as idiots
don't read manuals; and, anyway, the support staff have got better
things to do like gossip about Big Brother.

When I was in IT support we actually threw out working Canon printers
because the support was so appalling. (I say working, but even then
there were feeder problems and this was in the early 90's.).

I hope you're successful because someone needs to get their support
shaken up, and get their printers fit for the purpose for which they
are purchased.

And no, you probably shouldn't have called them liars because that
gives them the chance to say that you're abusive and refuse to deal
with you. However, suggesting they are committing terminological
inexactitudes will not only solve that problem as it's the same thing,
but make the support staff look for their dictionaries as the words
are more than two syllables long.

One more thing, if you really have problems, it's always worth
supplying the correspondence to the Head Office in Japan where they
tend to get rather more annoyed if Canon's name is being dragged
through the mud. It may not get you want you want, but it'll put a
rocket up the backsides of the GB staff.

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
you don't have, to impress people you don't like...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

You are wasting your time conversing with customer support. Go to the
Canon web site and find the name and address of the Chairman of the
Board, and the VP of Marketing. Copy everybody, including customer
support, and make clear that the copy list is included in the text. Be
sure to include the reference number as it lets the higher ups
determine exactly who was responsible for the escalation.

Usually, the higher ups will forward the message to the lower downs
and tell them to do something about it.

Jim


On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:25:05 +0100, "Miss Perspicacia Tick"
<test@test.com> wrote:

>I had another reply from the idiots at Canon about an hour ago: -
>
<snip>
>
>Again stating that both units are capable of printing on stock up to 270g/m²
>(273g/m² for the iP8500). It would appear that Canon do not know the
>specifications of their own printers! I have sent them a rather exasperated
>reply back.
>
>
>Here it is in full: -
>
<snip>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Burt wrote:

>"Miss Perspicacia Tick" <test@test.com> wrote in message
>news:jZzwe.142$DN.84@fe01.ams...
>
>
>>I had another reply from the idiots at Canon about an hour ago: -
>>
>>"Thank you for your recent enquiry regarding your Canon product. Canon
>>bubblejet printers are not designed to print card stock. It is not a
>>fault, it is simply due to the design of the printers. We hope this
>>information is of use to you."
>>
>>
>
>Miss Tick (Mystic?), Your question was apples and their reply was oranges.
>
>

And you are a fruit.

>You are concerned about the placement of the image on the page and they are
>answering about cardstock weight and feed issues. They still don't get it!
>
>

Neither do you.

>Am I correct
>
No

>that you wish to create a print that was borderless on three
>sides and the fourth side would be aligned exactly with the place you were
>going to fold it? The difference between the Epson and the Canon image
>placement may have something to do with how the drivers
>
DUH

>adjusts the image to
>avoid leaving a white margin at any border when doing a borderless print.
>I am not an apologist for Canon. I have used Epson and Canon printers. I
>don't think it has to do with paper slippage in the feed mechanism. For the
>particular project you originally wrote about, why not recognize the
>idiosyncracy of the printer and move the image slightly toward the fold in
>your image software prior to printing? As I mentioned, I use Photoshop
>Elements 2. I first set up a letter sized blank page, set the grid and
>ruler to on, copy the image to the blank page, adjust its size and position,
>and print. Worked for me.
>
>
Bundabar

>I don't blame you for being upset with customer or tech service reps who
>don't know their product and give poor advice.
>

Yeh, you know more than they do.

>In this case, although they
>are wrong, you can certainly do a simple "work-around" and solve the
>problem.
>
>
> >
>
>
>>OK, thought I, may be I am wrong (unlikely) I'll do some searching and see
>>what I can find. First stop, the manuals. This is what the manuals
>>state: -
>>
>>i9950
>>--------
>>Plain paper from 64-105g/m²
>>Speciality paper up to 270g/m²
>>
>>iP8500
>>----------
>>Plain paper from 64-105g/m²
>>Speciality paper up to 273g/m²
>>
>>OK, I'm all well and good there (the media I was using was 185g/m² and
>>210g/m² respectively). I then found the following brochures on the Canon
>>Europe site: -
>>
>>i9950
>>--------
>>http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/pdfs/Bubble_Jet_i9950-p7671-c3848-UK-1098100911.pdf
>>
>>iP8500
>>---------
>>http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/pdfs/PIXMA_iP8500-p7939-c3848-UK-1098101022.pdf
>>
>>Again stating that both units are capable of printing on stock up to
>>270g/m² (273g/m² for the iP8500). It would appear that Canon do not know
>>the specifications of their own printers! I have sent them a rather
>>exasperated reply back.
>>
>>
>>Here it is in full: -
>>
>>Please refer to incident number 1925551. It would appear that you do not
>>know the technical specifications of your own printers! Let me spell them
>>out to you: -
>>
>>i9950
>>--------
>>Plain paper from 64-105g/m²
>>Speciality paper up to 270g/m²
>>
>>iP8500
>>----------
>>Plain paper from 64-105g/m²
>>Speciality paper up to 273g/m²
>>
>>These specifications are taken from the manuals that accompanied both
>>units. The "cardstock" (as you call it) I am using is 185g/m² and 210g/m²
>>respectively. You claim that both units will print on media up to 270g/m².
>>
>>I went into town today and I purchased some of your own brand Photo Paper
>>Plus Glossy which has a weight of 270g/m², much heavier than the media I
>>was using, but still usable in my units as the manuals (and brochures)
>>state. I printed the same project to each printer and got exactly the same
>>results as with the lighter media. In all I have attempted to print the
>>project on the following Canon brand media: -
>>
>>LC-301
>>HR-101N
>>GP-401
>>PP-101
>>
>>
>>All with the same (predictable) result - slippage by between 1 and 2mm.
>>
>>Suggest you educate yourself about the units in question before telling
>>the customer that they "cannot print on cardstock".
>>
>>The more I converse with you, the more it becomes evident that you do not
>>know anything about your products. Both units are more than capable of
>>printing on stock up to 270g/m² as it states both ON YOUR WEBSITE and IN
>>THE MANUALS.
>>For your convenience, I have taken the liberty of including links to the
>>relevant product brochures.
>>
>>i9950
>>--------
>>http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/pdfs/Bubble_Jet_i9950-p7671-c3848-UK-1098100911.pdf
>>
>>iP8500
>>---------
>>http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/pdfs/PIXMA_iP8500-p7939-c3848-UK-1098101022.pdf
>>
>>Suggest you read them and inwardly digest the contents. If what you say is
>>true, your website, the brochures and the product manuals are all lying.
>>Is that what you are claiming? If that is the case it would appear that
>>you are attempting to deliberately mislead the customer. Is that the case?
>>It does not, however, explain why the same projects printed on much
>>lighter media would give the same results. The fact that the driver and/or
>>feed mechanism is inherently faulty and has been for years is a much
>>better explanation. I will get you to admit liability if it kills me
>>(and, at this rate, it probably will!)
>>
>>You're going to have to come up with a better explanation than that. I
>>have all the time in the world and I WILL persuade you to admit liability
>>that either the driver or feed mechanism in all your models, going back as
>>far as the 'S' series are faulty.
>>
>>What do you have to say to that?
>>
>>Maybe I shouldn't have accused them of lying but, right now I am just so
>>exasperated that they can even make such statement that the customer can
>>easily disprove and class as them being fobbed off.
>>
>>It's a damned good thing that Canon 'support' rep wasn't in this room or
>>I'd probably have decked him!
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Hecate wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:25:05 +0100, "Miss Perspicacia Tick"
> <test@test.com> wrote:
>
>> I had another reply from the idiots at Canon about an hour ago: -
>>
>> "Thank you for your recent enquiry regarding your Canon product.
>> Canon bubblejet printers are not designed to print card stock. It is
>> not a fault, it is simply due to the design of the printers. We hope
>> this information is of use to you."
>>
> Yet more reasons why I never buy Canon printers. I have to be fair
> and say I haven't had any such problem with the camera side of their
> company, but the "consumer goods" side (which I see as everything
> other than their Pro camera people) assumes that any inquiry is made
> by an idiot; that as they are idiots any explanation will do as idiots
> don't read manuals; and, anyway, the support staff have got better
> things to do like gossip about Big Brother.
>
> When I was in IT support we actually threw out working Canon printers
> because the support was so appalling. (I say working, but even then
> there were feeder problems and this was in the early 90's.).
>
> I hope you're successful because someone needs to get their support
> shaken up, and get their printers fit for the purpose for which they
> are purchased.
>
> And no, you probably shouldn't have called them liars because that
> gives them the chance to say that you're abusive and refuse to deal
> with you. However, suggesting they are committing terminological
> inexactitudes will not only solve that problem as it's the same thing,
> but make the support staff look for their dictionaries as the words
> are more than two syllables long.
>
> One more thing, if you really have problems, it's always worth
> supplying the correspondence to the Head Office in Japan where they
> tend to get rather more annoyed if Canon's name is being dragged
> through the mud. It may not get you want you want, but it'll put a
> rocket up the backsides of the GB staff.

Yes, you're right, I shouldn't have said that. But that rep just made me see
scarlet! I should have chosen my words more carefully. Thanks for the
advice.

I will write to anyone and everyone because I bought this unit for a purpose
and I cannot use it for that purpose.

Thanks, Hecate. I will also take Jim's advice and write to everybody who I
think will listen.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

zakezuke wrote:
> Miss Perspicacia Tick wrote:
>> I had another reply from the idiots at Canon about an hour ago: -
>>
>> "Thank you for your recent enquiry regarding your Canon product.
>> Canon bubblejet printers are not designed to print card stock. It is
>> not a fault, it is simply due to the design of the printers. We hope
>> this information is of use to you."
>>
>> OK, thought I, may be I am wrong (unlikely) I'll do some searching
>> and see what I can find. First stop, the manuals. This is what the
>> manuals state: -
>
>
> I'd like to reproduce your error... can you explain to me in step by
> step detail including the software you are using to do the.. what I
> assume is greeting cards?


Why bother? It isn't a software issue. Taliesyn has had the same problems
and I daresay he's using different software to me.

It happens with all sofware, I've used: -

MS Publisher 2003
PagePlus 10.04
InDesign CS2 (though TBH this is too complicated to set up)


What you have to bear in mind is that the same project printed to an R800
prints flawlessly.

The setup is simple. Whack the image on the front with no margins. Place
credit text on back. Set printer to full bleed (maximum borderless). Print.

The same project printed to two different printers - prints flawlessly on
the Epson, doesn't on either Canon. Explain that.


> I find it so amazing that a function that would seem to be within the
> target market of the product be screwy.

Well it is. I don't know whether it's the driver or the paper feed
mechanism, but it is. According to Canon it's because I'm printing on
"cardstock". Well 270g/m² /is/ card stock to me. So bollocks, say I, to
that!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Hi Miss Perspicacia Tick,

If I've understood your previous post correctly you are trying to print
greetings cards (eg An A4 or Letter size page printed on one half) but there
is a problem with it not printing right upto the fold?

I think the solution might be to tell the printer that it's printing on A5
Landscape rather than A4 and to print borderless. This should enlarge your
image to be slightly greater than A5 size (A5=half A4). You should
experiment on plain A4 paper before trying this on your expensive card.

Either way what you are trying to do will only work with the right size of
image....bear with me I know you said it works on the Epson.... The
borderless function on most printers doesn't just remove the borders it
enlarges the image slightly to allow for any alignment problems on the paper
to guarantee there isn't a thin wedge shape border down one edge. It's
possible that your image is slightly too small or the wrong aspect ratio and
that your Epson is OVER enlarging it - and as a result it looks correct on
your Epson but is too small on the Canon.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

If it's a feed problem part of the image should be missing off the edge
compared to what the Epson produces. Can you see that?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"CWatters" <colin.watters@pandoraBOX.be> wrote in message
news:e1Swe.133770$PH4.7042098@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
> If it's a feed problem part of the image should be missing off the edge
> compared to what the Epson produces. Can you see that?

If it's a feed problem with card - what does it do if you try it with
regular paper?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"CWatters" <colin.watters@pandoraBOX.be> wrote in message
news:f%Rwe.133768$ms1.7223342@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
> Hi Miss Perspicacia Tick,
>
> If I've understood your previous post correctly you are trying to print
> greetings cards (eg An A4 or Letter size page printed on one half) but
there
> is a problem with it not printing right upto the fold?
>
> I think the solution might be to tell the printer that it's printing on A5
> Landscape rather than A4 and to print borderless. This should enlarge
your
> image to be slightly greater than A5 size (A5=half A4). You should
> experiment on plain A4 paper before trying this on your expensive card.

I should add that this won't work if using card priting program to print
image on one half and text greeting on the other. Just print the image from
XP on one half then then overprint with a greeting on the other half using
whatever program.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

CWatters wrote:
> If it's a feed problem part of the image should be missing off the
> edge compared to what the Epson produces. Can you see that?

Not entirely sure what you mean. The image is complete (or looks it) it's
just 'slipped' down the page. Does that make sense (I'd be surprised if it
does because nothing I say makes much sense these days...).

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Miss Perspicacia Tick" <test@test.com> wrote in message
news:QOUwe.1651$YM5.1325@fe02.ams...
> CWatters wrote:
> > If it's a feed problem part of the image should be missing off the
> > edge compared to what the Epson produces. Can you see that?
>
> Not entirely sure what you mean. The image is complete (or looks it) it's
> just 'slipped' down the page. Does that make sense (I'd be surprised if it
> does because nothing I say makes much sense these days...).

What I mean is..

If you are printing borderless and it's slipped down the page due to a paper
feed problem, then more will have been printed over the edge of the page and
will be missing.

If it's not a paper feed problem (and you say it's the same for all media -
sorry I mised that before) but a scaling problem then more of the image will
be on the page.

Colin

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

CWatters wrote:
> "CWatters" <colin.watters@pandoraBOX.be> wrote in message
> news:e1Swe.133770$PH4.7042098@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
>> If it's a feed problem part of the image should be missing off the
>> edge compared to what the Epson produces. Can you see that?
>
> If it's a feed problem with card - what does it do if you try it with
> regular paper?

I don't mean to be unkind but, had you read my original post properly, you'd
have seen I'd tried with regular paper. LC-301 /is/ Canon's "regular paper".
Card or paper makes no difference. It happens on *all* media.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Miss Perspicacia Tick" <test@test.com> wrote in message
news:mQUwe.1652$YM5.292@fe02.ams...
>
> I don't mean to be unkind but, had you read my original post properly,
you'd
> have seen I'd tried with regular paper. LC-301 /is/ Canon's "regular
paper".
> Card or paper makes no difference. It happens on *all* media.

Sorry got fed up with all the rants between the usual two suspects.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

CWatters wrote:
> "Miss Perspicacia Tick" <test@test.com> wrote in message
> news:mQUwe.1652$YM5.292@fe02.ams...
>>
>> I don't mean to be unkind but, had you read my original post
>> properly, you'd have seen I'd tried with regular paper. LC-301 /is/
>> Canon's "regular paper". Card or paper makes no difference. It
>> happens on *all* media.
>
> Sorry got fed up with all the rants between the usual two suspects.

That's what kill-files are for, y'know. I've had 'em both kill-filed for,
well, ever.

Apologies if I was a bit short with you, it wasn't intentional...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

CWatters wrote:
> "CWatters" <colin.watters@pandoraBOX.be> wrote in message
> news:f%Rwe.133768$ms1.7223342@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
>> Hi Miss Perspicacia Tick,
>>
>> If I've understood your previous post correctly you are trying to
>> print greetings cards (eg An A4 or Letter size page printed on one
>> half) but there is a problem with it not printing right upto the
>> fold?
>>
>> I think the solution might be to tell the printer that it's printing
>> on A5 Landscape rather than A4 and to print borderless. This should
>> enlarge your image to be slightly greater than A5 size (A5=half A4).
>> You should experiment on plain A4 paper before trying this on your
>> expensive card.
>
> I should add that this won't work if using card priting program to
> print image on one half and text greeting on the other. Just print
> the image from XP on one half then then overprint with a greeting on
> the other half using whatever program.

Serif PagePlus is my application of choice these days (it's far more
flexible than MS Publisher and less inclined to give me a headache for small
jobs than is InDesign). Unlike Publisher, it will print an A4/A5 tent card
as one document (in Publisher you're forced to set up the middle as a
separate file).

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Sarah, after reading all the replies back and forth I don't recall seeing
any mention of an actual measurement of the image. It could be that the
printer isn't 100% accurate and is scaling back the image. How about
creating a simple box that spans most of a sheet and then take measurements?
--
Ron

"Miss Perspicacia Tick" <test@test.com> wrote in message
news:vUWwe.425$DN.88@fe01.ams...
> CWatters wrote:
>> "CWatters" <colin.watters@pandoraBOX.be> wrote in message
>> news:f%Rwe.133768$ms1.7223342@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
>>> Hi Miss Perspicacia Tick,
>>>
>>> If I've understood your previous post correctly you are trying to
>>> print greetings cards (eg An A4 or Letter size page printed on one
>>> half) but there is a problem with it not printing right upto the
>>> fold?
>>>
>>> I think the solution might be to tell the printer that it's printing
>>> on A5 Landscape rather than A4 and to print borderless. This should
>>> enlarge your image to be slightly greater than A5 size (A5=half A4).
>>> You should experiment on plain A4 paper before trying this on your
>>> expensive card.
>>
>> I should add that this won't work if using card priting program to
>> print image on one half and text greeting on the other. Just print
>> the image from XP on one half then then overprint with a greeting on
>> the other half using whatever program.
>
> Serif PagePlus is my application of choice these days (it's far more
> flexible than MS Publisher and less inclined to give me a headache for
> small jobs than is InDesign). Unlike Publisher, it will print an A4/A5
> tent card as one document (in Publisher you're forced to set up the middle
> as a separate file).
>

 

[zakezuke]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

> The setup is simple. Whack the image on the front with no margins. Place
> credit text on back. Set printer to full bleed (maximum borderless). Print.
>
> The same project printed to two different printers - prints flawlessly on
> the Epson, doesn't on either Canon. Explain that.


Thanks Perspicacia...

I can't explain, i'm baffled... just wasn't sure from your description
what exactly it was you were printing. 100% baffled that the target
market, a big one at least in the states, are soccer moms with suvs
making birthday cards.

The most heavy paper I have is 260g/m2.... might do the trick. What I
am confused about is... your just talking cards right... full bleed
boardless, without printing on the back at all, just a picture inside?
Am I correct?

But I have an hp and and epson i'll test as well to see if I experence
the same issue.