Measurement Studio for .NET Languages

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

ScatterGraph Print Quality 8.1.2

Hi,
 
I have just started using the evaluation version of Measurement Studio 8.1.2, ready to upgrade from Professional 7.0.  It seems that the ScatterGraph's
Draw(ComponentDrawArgs) method is producing a much poorer quality print than in v.7.0. The Axis and LegendItem text seems to be low resolution font and the graph lines are quite blocky. Like the print is done stretched at screen dpi instead of printer dpi. Is this just a restriction on the evaluation version (we have an order for the professional version anyway) or has something changed?
 
Thanks for any help,
Chris
0 Kudos
Message 1 of 6
(4,348 Views)
Hi Chris,

The evaluation version doesn't have anything to do with the behavior you are seeing as you are given full functionality with the evaluation version. 

Could you post two screenshots (one from 7.0 and one from 8.1.2) that show the resolution differences between the two versions? I assume you are running the exact same code in both 7.0 and 8.1.2 and are just seeing worse quality? Do you see if this bad quality with our Printing shipping example located in the
Documents and Settings\All Users\Documents\National Instruments\MStudioVS2005\DotNET\Examples\UI\WindowsForms\Graph\Printing\ directory?

It would also be helpful if you could provide some small code snippets that I could look at.

Best Regards,

Jonathan N.
National Instruments
0 Kudos
Message 2 of 6
(4,339 Views)
Jonathan,
 
The screen resolution is fine so posting a screenshot will not really help. Interestingly, we do get exactly the same behaviour with your Printing example so you should be able to reproduce there.
 
Steps to reproduce
Taking the printing example in "C:\Program Files\National Instruments\MeasurementStudioVS2005\DotNET\Examples\UI\WindowsForms\Graph\Printing\cs" with assemblies versions :
  • NationalInstruments.Common - 8.1.20.165
  • NationalInstruments.UI - 8.1.20.256
  • NationalInstruments.UI.WindowsForms - 8.1.20.256

Run and click print.

Change references to:

  • NationalInstruments.Common - 8.0.11.141
  • NationalInstruments.UI - 7.0.0.341
  • NationalInstruments.UI.WindowsForms - 7.0.0.341

Rebuild, run and click print. We see a distinct difference in the quality of the print, the second being higher quality than the first.

Hope this helps and thanks for your reply,

Cheers,

Chris 

 

 

0 Kudos
Message 3 of 6
(4,326 Views)
Hi,
 
Is anyone looking into this we are approaching a release date and would like to a resolution? It seems odd that a newer release would be worse quality than an older version...
 
Cheers,
Chris
0 Kudos
Message 4 of 6
(4,297 Views)
Hi Chris,

I do agree that the behavior does seem odd as you as the user should expect the quality to get better. I did validate the behavior you saw between versions 7.0 and 8.1.2 and the problem only seems to be related to drawing the entire graph verse the individual sub-components.  If you notice in the example, if you try and just draw the sine wave, square wave, etc instead of the graph, the quality is better than 7.0. However, its only when you select the Graph option which calls the ControlBase.Draw method do you see the problem. I went ahead and created a bug report with ID 107630 for your reference. At this point, I'm not really sure all the implications of why the change was made and so further investigation is needed.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

P.S. If you ever need immediate assistance, please contact our support department.

Best Regards,
Jonathan N.
National Instruments
0 Kudos
Message 5 of 6
(4,295 Views)

Thanks Jonathan,

 

It would be very good if NI can improve the output of the Draw function. Or can you give any good tips for aligning individual sub-components into right places?

 

There are two pictures in this message; the first is made by the Draw function and the second is printed by the individual sub-components.Smiley Surprised (MS Studio 8.5)

 

BR,
Ilkka

 

 

Download All
0 Kudos
Message 6 of 6
(4,160 Views)