thanks guys
I will give both a try tonight and report on my findings.
I appreciate the help. I understand what your saying that it works in pixels, but unfortunately. I am printing small items, and if its off by 3-4 pixels, its very noticeable.
Even more frustrating, it gets expensive as it uses up a sheet of labels that are not the right size. so they become scrap. and if I over size, I end up loosing parts of the picture.
To further add to my comments above.
When I say I do not know the pixel size, I am saying each image is different, so I can find out the pixel size, but long term its going to change constantly. so ahead of time, I wont know the pixel size for any perticular image.
and for what I am doing, the size of what gets printed , is more important then the pixel count.
I need the print out to be 1.30 inches, not 1.27 or 1.40. I dont mind if its 1.27 because I can stretch it and paint in detail, but I would only learn the size after its printed and that is proving to be expensive over the long term.
I will give both a try tonight and report on my findings.
I appreciate the help. I understand what your saying that it works in pixels, but unfortunately. I am printing small items, and if its off by 3-4 pixels, its very noticeable.
Even more frustrating, it gets expensive as it uses up a sheet of labels that are not the right size. so they become scrap. and if I over size, I end up loosing parts of the picture.
To further add to my comments above.
When I say I do not know the pixel size, I am saying each image is different, so I can find out the pixel size, but long term its going to change constantly. so ahead of time, I wont know the pixel size for any perticular image.
and for what I am doing, the size of what gets printed , is more important then the pixel count.
I need the print out to be 1.30 inches, not 1.27 or 1.40. I dont mind if its 1.27 because I can stretch it and paint in detail, but I would only learn the size after its printed and that is proving to be expensive over the long term.