ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: not enough memory?



> I have a scanned image that is 17.6 MB.  I am trying to print it on an Epson
> 2200, 13x19 @1440dpi.  I am getting an error after the printer driver has
> initiated, prior to anything actually going out to the printer, saying that
> there is not enough memory for this operation, and to close any unused
> applications.

My guess would be that the driver stores the entire rendered image in
RAM before sending it to the printer. (This is technically not
necessary and it would have been easy to render the image as it is
sent without storing more than a few lines of it, but EPSON must have
chosen the high way when writing the driver.)

Printing 13x19 (inches I assume) at 1440dpi makes >500 million pixels,
each of which contains 7 bits (each of the 7 colours is either printed
or not), so the uncompressed rendered image sent to the printer is
something like 448 MB. The driver compresses this before sending it to
the printer, but with a very cheap and inefficient algorithm which
doesn't actually save much space. So your 320 MB RAM don't seem that
much after all.

> There are no other applications open except for the Mac Finder.  I have over
> 180 MB of unused memory available on my Mac G4, with a total of 320 MB of
> hardware RAM.  Virtual memory is off, but it shouldn't be needed, and I have
> not needed it before.  I have set the preferred allocation of memory for PS
> Elements to 120 MB (it was at 44 MB, but I upped it just to be sure that was
> not an issue.)

Virtual RAM never hurts. Why turn it off in the first place?

> Am I correct in assuming that the size of the file that is being transmitted
> to the printer is 17.6 MB, which is the actual image file size on the hard
> drive, and the same as reported in Elements?

See above.

> So what has changed?  I added some Epson 2200 profiles that I downloaded
> from Epson, and I changed a setting or two in the print setup in PS
> Elements.  But why should any of that matter?  I have printed larger files
> on 13x19 before, so I am stumped.  Any ideas?

Maybe you're just a few MB over the available RAM. Turn virtual memory
on, that's my suggestion.

  Andras

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.