After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 535187 - Print not to scale
Print not to scale
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 524615
Product: GIMP
Classification: Other
Component: General
2.4.x
Other Windows
: Normal major
: ---
Assigned To: GIMP Bugs
GIMP Bugs
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2008-05-28 02:40 UTC by David Anderson
Modified: 2008-10-30 20:13 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description David Anderson 2008-05-28 02:40:14 UTC
I am having the same problem. With both an Epson printer and an earlier GIMP version, and now with a Canon printer and GIMP 2.4.5, no matter how I set the "print size" in the GIMP menu, the output is always a small section of the upper left corner of the image greatly magnified. 

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #524615 +++

Please describe the problem:
Under Gimp 2.4.5 for Windows (XP), i can not print a picture to scale.
Tried with two different PC and two different printers.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Load a picture
2. Change the Printing Dimensions (Image, Printing dimension, 100x75mm) 
3. Go to the Print menu, on the preview screen all seems fine: the picture is on the correct scale
4. Print   


Actual results:

The result will be that the upper left corner of the picture will be zoomed and printed.


Expected results:


Does this happen every time?

Yes

Other information:
Comment 1 Edmund Wong 2008-05-28 03:55:37 UTC
I also have this problem, but I'm running Gimp 2.4.5 on Vista SP1.  No
matter which printer I choose (HP1006 or to PDF using PDF995),  the top
left corner is printed at a very large size.

Btw, this bug looks like a duplicate of bug #491230.  

Comment 2 Martin Nordholts 2008-05-28 06:30:04 UTC
We appreciate you took the time to report a bug David, but why did you report a bug you even knew would be a duplicate?

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 524615 ***
Comment 3 Edmund Wong 2008-05-28 09:00:06 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> We appreciate you took the time to report a bug David, but why did you report a
> bug you even knew would be a duplicate?
> 
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 524615 ***
> 

Isn't bug 524615 similar (if not a duplicate) to bug #491230?  They look
like the same.  


Comment 4 Sven Neumann 2008-05-28 09:29:51 UTC
That is left to the GTK+ developers to decide. You may want to offer your help, if you can.