Digital BW, The Print

I've used it for years because of its complete (and simple, once you get 
used to the interface) control of placement of multiple objects on a 
page, the purpose for which it was originally designed.  Two examples.  
First, I print my own Christmas cards, with a 4.5 x 4.5 image and a 4.5 
x 1.5 greeting below it, printed two "cards" to a page of 8.5 x 11 and 
cut to 5 x 7 for mailing.  The card "layout" is saved as a template, so 
each year I just drop a new image in the image spots and a new greeting 
in the greeting spots and print 50 pages giving me 100 cards.

Second, I print books of photos as Christmas gifts for various family 
members, but the books are different for different branches of the 
family.  The images are 8 x 8 printed on the "right" end of landscaped 
8.5 x 11 paper with quarter inch margins top, right and bottom, with the 
image name printed at the far "left" end of the page.  The image name 
lets me assemble the right images into the right books (I print from 
worksheets made up in advance showing who gets what image, then print 
the number of each image needed and stack 'em up.)   When it's time to 
assemble the books I can easily sort from the worksheets according to 
the image name on each print, and once the proper set of images is 
assembled for a particular family member the image names are cut off to 
leave the proper 3/4 inch binding margin and the images bound up in 
covers.  Again, the images are all dropped into a template that places 
the image for the proper margins and puts the name where it belongs.

If all you ever print is a single image on a single sheet then this 
multiple print flexibility won't mean much.  But if you've got a need to 
control the size and placing of multiple images on a page (or if you 
just want the easiest way to produce a collection of images on a single 
sheet - one 5x7, one 4x5 and some wallets, for example) I don't think 
you'll find a better product than QImage.  I've certainly never 
regretted whatever it cost to buy in the first place.

Cheers,
Kip

Richard Smallfield wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I have wondered about buying Qimage for a while ... but, being pleased 
> with my
> output, have not been able to justify another software purchase.
>
> Can anyone give three compelling reasons for getting Qimage? I prefer 
> not to
> upsample much anyway (and tend to shoot 25-35mp images), so their 
> improved
> algorithms may not be that important to me.
>
> I sometimes print D70 images on 13x19" paper, but even then I'm not 
> sure their
> pyramid interpolation would be worth the extra purchase.
>
> However, there may be some feature that I've not thought of that is 
> really,
> realy, really, really (really, really) a bit useful.
>

> ___ 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]