Gold-Method conversion for Corel

[Dave Johnson29]

Hi all,

I have been messing with the Gold Method approach but in Corel 10. Has anyone done a Corel Macro that mimics the Gold-Method for PS?

Try as I might using the "Before" pic, I cannot get the results to match the "After" on this site...
http://www.dogcollarlabor.com/smc/

Thanks

[Frank Corker]

Dave the one that you pointed to at dogcollar is for photoshop. I can't see how you managed to get it to work in Corel, it wasn't intended for that.

[Dave Johnson29]

I can't see how you managed to get it to work in Corel, it wasn't intended for that.


:):) Might need to slow down, kick back and make a cup of tea Frank, :):) that's why I asked if there was a conversion of the script to a Corel Macro.

I assumed this description was what the PS Action did.
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showpost.php?p=735167&postcount=2

Using that process I cannot get anything like the "after" pic.

Sorry for the confusion, I should have elaborated a little more/better.

[Doug Griffith]

You must be talking PhotoPaint?

If you manage to create a good working macro, let me know and I'll add it to the dogcollarlabor/smc page.

Cheers,
Doug

[Dave Johnson29]

If you manage to create a good working macro, let me know and I'll add it to the dogcollarlabor/smc page.


Hi Doug,

Yup Corel PhotoPaint. No problem writing the macro I just cannot get a fine enough dot size compared to the "After" when following the Gold method. I am sure what I get is probably acceptable, but I would like to get closer to that "After" before I write the macro.

Actually just had a bit of a wild Hare and tried something different. I need to burn a sample. I had t cut a small part out of the entire pic to get in under the upload limit.

[Doug Griffith]

The dot size should correspond to the final output resolution of the file.

The trick is getting high contrast without blowing out the whites and closing up the black. Also a good amount of sharpening and a smooth dither pattern while maintaining fine details.

Cheers,
Doug

[Frank Corker]

I can't believe that's the third time this year I've got something wrong. Actually on the picture that you displayed I quite like the look of the one that you have done. It seems very even and that in my opinion (of which I'm entitled to have) is a good thing.

[Dave Johnson29]

I can't believe that's the third time this year I've got something wrong. Actually on the picture that you displayed I quite like the look of the one that you have done. It seems very even and that in my opinion (of which I'm entitled to have) is a good thing.


:) Look on the bright side Frank, the year is almost over so you have probably hit your limit. :D

I am burning that pic into a 4" tile as we speak.

Only thing I noticed is that I saved it as a GIF and when I imported it into Corel 5 which runs the laser, it now has squares like a grid. I am burning it anyway to see how the dithering turns out and will figure out the grid problem later. I loaded the GIF into PhotoPaint-5 and there was no grid.

More to come...

[Doug Griffith]

...when I imported it into Corel 5 which runs the laser, it now has squares like a grid.

What you see in Corel is most likely a poor screen proxy of the file. The file when viewed in PhotoPaint should be a better approximation of the true dots. Screens display square while printers (and lasers) print round so you never really see true output as it is.

Cheers,
Doug

[Dave Johnson29]

What you see in Corel is most likely a poor screen proxy of the file.


Hi Doug,

Yup, you are correct, it was the screen. I have to run win3.1 for this old laser and win3.1 does not recognize the S3 graphics card. :)

OK, so here is the result. I am not sure if it is good or bad as I am not sure what a good version would look like. Also this is my second try on a tile and I halved the laser setting recommendations and it looks like I can halve again.

All comments are appreciated in this learning curve.

[Doug Griffith]

I have to say that doesn't look good. I'd aim towards it looking like a greyscale print from an inkjet printer with smooth gradients. I'm sure others with more experience etching photographs will have better feedback.

Cheers,
Doug

[Tim Bateson]

Really - Only 3 times Frank... I thought you were married?

[Frank Corker]

Really - Only 3 times Frank... I thought you were married?

Whoa Tim! Have you met my wife? She'd kill you! (don't tell her I said that)


Dave, sorry buddy, that's not good at all and it looks quite heavy too. Maybe Corel hasn't got what it needs to get it right.

[Dave Johnson29]

Dave, sorry buddy, that's not good at all and it looks quite heavy too. Maybe Corel hasn't got what it needs to get it right.


Thanks Frank,

That is only my second try with a tile and both came out heavy like that. I suspect it is the laser setting as that took almost 1-1/2 hours and it is only 3.5" high.

The "manual" suggested a Pulse Width of 1000, Rate of 39K and a speed of 5cm/sec. I used 450 Width but it still came out heavy. I will play with the DPI in the Print Setup and see if that helps.

Going from your earlier comment, I assume I have the pic looking like it should burn OK so I am guessing that it is Corel sending or the firmware burning that is causing the big chunks.

I ain't done yet, a friend gave me 20 of the 4" tiles!