Reduce print size on startup

SIZE OF PRINT NEEDS TO BE REDUCED ON START UP

Your description of this problem is so terse, it is not understandable.
Is this your Printer? Your display? what text is problematic? why should it be reduced at startup but no other time?
What are you talking about?

Similar Messages

  • HP Officejet 6700 Premium Printer - reduce print size of document

    How do I reduce the size of a document when printing? 
    With all my previous HP printers I simply went into Printer Properties (Print Dialog Box) and  Effects tab to choose the 'Resizing Options' (e.g. 51% of normal size) - I cannot find this option in the HP 6700 Printer Properties 
    This question was solved.
    View Solution.

    Hello JollyJohnny, and welcome to the HP Forums, I hope you enjoy your experience!
    I see you are having issues resizing your documents. I would love to try and help you, but I do need a little information first. I am linking a few HP Support documents below that will show you how to find which operating system you are using. Also, if you're using Windows, please include whether your operating system is 32-bit or 64-bit. With this information we can provide you with accurate information.
    Mac OS X: How Do I Find Which Mac OS X Version Is on My Computer?
    Which Windows operating system am I running?
    Is the Windows Version on My Computer 32-bit or 64-bit?
    Good luck and please let me know the results of your findings. Thank you for posting on the HP Forums!
    Please click “Accept as Solution " if you feel my post solved your issue, it will help others find the solution.
    Click the “Kudos, Thumbs Up" on the right to say “Thanks" for helping!
    Jamieson
    I work on behalf of HP
    "Remember, I'm pulling for you, we're all in this together!" - Red Green.

  • Crystal 2008 Reduces Print Size

    We have noticed some strange printing results on a few of our reports in the Crystal 2008 Windows form viewer that we use in our .NET application.  For example, we have a few reports that will print perfectly from the Designer, but the entire output (font, images, etc.) is reduced and centered on the page when printed through our application.  This is problematic whenever the report is printed on u201Cspecialu201D stock other than plain paper, such as stock with preprinted image areas or perforations. In such cases, we have problems of misalignment.  We have discovered that the reports that exhibit this behavior have 0 margins, which we are planning to fix by setting .25 inch margins. 
    I would like to know, however, are there any other printing issues we need to be aware of in the Crystal 2008 viewer?  Does the Printer Driver Dependency article still apply to Crystal 2008, or is there a more up to date version of best practices for printing? 
    Thanks
    Darin

    Hello,
    Search on ForceLargeFonts and see if that registry key helps...
    PDF export
    Then Export to PDF and then print the report.
    Also, try the No Printer option and Dissociate check box.
    There are known issues due to MS's .NET Framework and printer drivers, MS scales the print job just slightly and nothing CR can do to force it not to. We tracked it and R&D told use they can't resolve the scaling issue, it's MS doing it.
    It works in CR Designer because it still uses WIN32 API's and the legacy DEVMODE(W) structure which can get to. .NET handles DEVMODE(W) in a new way which we can't control fully.
    Don
    Edited by: Don Williams on Jan 2, 2012 3:34 PM

  • How can I print a pdf doc of size A3 (one page only) on A4 (on one page) front and back (actual size duplex printing) without reducing the size?

    The printing should come of actual size half on front and half on back of A4 paper.

    Hi Fakhar,
    That is not possible without reducing the size. It cant be possible at all.
    Regards,
    Ajlan Huda.

  • HP Photosmart C4585 - can't print test pages + copies are all reduced in size

    I have 2 problems with an HP Photosmart C4585 All-in-one printer.
    Firstly, I cannot print test prints ie 'Network Configuration Page' and the 'Run Wireless Network Test' page. It sounds as though it's printing but it produces blank sheets.
    Secondly, trying to Copy A4 originals to A4 paper the printout is always reduced in size to about a quarter of the sheet (more like photo size) - no matter which setting I select. It's also printed blue.
    The printer is not connected to a computer but I successfully print A4 documents in black, from an iPad using the HP ePrint app. So it is just the copy facility which is malfunctioning.
    Can anyone help? Thanks.

    Hi there,
    Lets eliminate software interference by downloading and running the print and scan doctor located here:
    http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c03275041&cc=us&dlc=en&lc=en
    It can fix a lot on its own and if not give a better idea of what is going on.
    Best of Luck!
    You can say thanks by clicking the Kudos Star in my post. If my post resolves your problem, please mark it as Accepted Solution so others can benefit too.

  • I am shooting with a Nikon D60 on Fine Format and unable to print larger than 11x14.  I have been able to print larger pictures.  I am told iPhoto reduces the size of the file when uploaded. Is this true? If so how can I change this?  I need 16x20's

    I am shooting with a Nikon D60 on Fine Format and unable to print larger than 11x14.  I have been able to print larger pictures.  I am told iPhoto reduces the size of the file when uploaded. Is this true? If so how can I change this?  I need 16x20's

    I am shooting with a Nikon D60 on Fine Format and unable to print larger than 11x14.  I have been able to print larger pictures.  I am told iPhoto reduces the size of the file when uploaded. Is this true? If so how can I change this?  I need 16x20's

  • How do i reduce the size of the pdf's scanned from my printer

    i scan from my printer to a pdf.  the file comes across way to big (2mb for 4 pages with no pictures & just text, etc.)  i have already re-set the settings on my scanner / printer to try to get the smallest dpi & image possible.  how do i get to the settings on my adobe acrobat to reduce the size of the pdf when saved on my computer or is this not the right place to do that?

    m spires wrote:
    i have already re-set the settings on my scanner / printer to try to get the smallest dpi & image possible.
    You may need to reset that to use higher scan quality for successful OCR.

  • How do you reduce the size of the print diolog box when printing a pdf file?

    How do you reduce the size of the print diolog box when trying to print a PDF file? The print button is below the task bar.

    What is your monitor's screen resolution?  See http://www.adobe.com/products/reader/tech-specs.html

  • Is there a way to reduce the size of a final PDF created for print when saving a file?

    Is there a way to reduce the size of a final PDF created for print when saving in any software (especially illustrator)? I don't want any quality to decrease at the same time. Thanks!

    Personally I would avoid optimizing the PDF's via Adobe Acrobat Pro unless you understand what you are removing from the PDF; having said that, it is the most effective way to reduce the file-size in the right hands.
    If I am sending out layouts for commercial print I change my default Print / Export setting from Standard to PDF/A-1b:2005 (CMYK). This will resolve a lot of common print problems for print-ready documents and it should embed your fonts and flatten transparencies etc.
    If your document is still too large you run an Audit Space Usage using Adobe Acrobat Pro. In the left pane enable 'Content' and then hit the button in the top left corner of the Content Pane and choose Audit Space Usage.

  • Adobe Reader print size reduced from page to page

    When I try to print a pdf file using Adobe Reader 7.0.9
    under Linux Fedora Core 6, I get the print size reduced
    from page to page. After several pages, the whole page
    text are centered and the words are too small to see.
    I can print the pdf files perfectly with Adobe Reader
    under windows, and all pdf files have the same problem
    with adobe reader under Linux.
    I can look at pdf files using Document Viewer or KPDF
    and these print correctly. I can also look at them
    with KGhostView, but this prints in the same peculiar
    way as Adobe Reader used to print.
    If I choose to print a pdf file to a ps file,
    this creates a ps file that prints just fine.
    I don't have this printing problem until one day
    I used a small "Scale: % of Normal Size"
    in order to print a large size pdf picture.
    I have a lot free space and the computer is networked.
    Thanks for help.

    You can use an extension to set a default font size and page zoom on web pages.
    *Default FullZoom Level: https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/default-fullzoom-level/
    *NoSquint: https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/nosquint/

  • How do i reduce the size of a document when printing on my HP8600 all in one printer

    I want to reduce the size of a document when I copy it on my HP 8600 all in one printer.  Can it be done?

    Hi,
    Yes, from the printer control panel:
    Various settings available from the printer's control panel, including the following:
    • Number of copies
    • Copy paper size
    • Copy paper type
    • Copy speed or quality
    • Lighter/Darker settings
    • Resizing originals to fit on different paper sizes
    Touch Copy, Settings, Resize, Custom   ... then Done.
    Back to Copy menu then touch Black or Color to copy.
    Regards.
    BH
    **Click the KUDOS thumb up on the left to say 'Thanks'**
    Make it easier for other people to find solutions by marking a Reply 'Accept as Solution' if it solves your problem.

  • PLEASE HELP! How can I reduce the size of my print jobs??

    I have created a report which requires graphics. It prints out a header and a JTable below it. Each report is sent to printer as seperate job, and I profiled it as 1 MB each! How to reduce this please?
    Andres-Louis Jorneaux

    You can't reduce the size that I know of but you can reduce the number by grouping them. Moving one icon on top of the other will create a folder. Also notice the horizontal scroll dots or swipe feature.

  • Trouble reducing image size so that it prints on one page

    Before upgrade to safari 6.0 I would be able to fit screenshots into one page simply by command & minus key.  Now shrinking screen image has no effect at all on reducing the print size of the image.  I have to mess with scale % in the print dialogue box and this is a pain.  Anybody know a solution?

    It would be good practice to search for the key word watermark in Pages User Guide to get detailed infos.
    Yvan KOENIG (VALLAURIS, France) mercredi 22 juin 2011 18:51:52
    iMac 21”5, i7, 2.8 GHz, 4 Gbytes, 1 Tbytes, mac OS X 10.6.7
    Please : Search for questions similar to your own
    before submitting them to the community.
    As you may see in the "More like this" box,
    your question was already asked and answered !
    To be the AW6 successor, iWork MUST integrate a TRUE DB, not a list organizer !

  • How to reduce the size of winsxs in windows 7 ultimate x64

    Ok so first off there are some caveats to responding to this question
    1.) Im on windows 7, so DONT refer to some "winsxs is important" vista link...
    2.) i am well aware of what windows side by side is for, and appreciate dll ____ must be bad for some... but lets be honest, professional people like me know how to keep a system in shape and not remove DLL files willy nilly and should have some kind of
    "i know what im doing" option
    3.) i know its important system files blah blah blah
    4.) i know it MUST be possible to trim this... vsp1cln.exe and compcln.exe from vista sp1 and sp2 respectively shows it CAN be done
    so in light of that, as there is no vsp1cln.exe or compcln.exe included on windows 7 i need to know if they are compatible with windows 7 if i just pull down a version from vista.
    if not, there must be some kind of method to reduce winsxs size... mine is currently at 6.2GB and that... frankly... is too big, i can understand a few GB worth, but 6! thats a whole windows xp installation!
    now, if a utility could be written that would be detrimental to compatibility but acceptable in terms of limited damage then that would be good, perhaps removing the ability to uninstall updates if for example, your system has been stable since february
    i know i wont have problems and have the retail disk if it gets fubar.
    I cant see what all that folder is for... i mean if you dont want such compatibility or the ability to install extra components without finding the disk then you should be able to remove that... i dont use a lot of the server side components, so why cant
    i remove those.
    also winsxs uses a lot of hardlinks and junctions that are reporting hard drive usage that isnt actually used as explorer counts these files repeatedly, there must be a way to tell explorer not to count those files... it might be all well and good to say
    theres 2gb not actually being used, but if windows is throwing a fit because it thinks im out of space then those 2gb might as well be 2 TB for all the use they are to me.
    lets take for example the winsxs/backup folder, there are about 60% of that taken up with FONT BACKUPS... i mean SERIOUSLY! ... you backed up the FONTS!?
    WHY!?!?
    There must be more things like those that could go
    perhaps someone could get back in touch and explain why microsoft windows is the ONLY operating system that seems to think that if it doesnt have 80 hundred million backups and spares it wont work... linux does not have this side by side thing, nor does
    macosx

    Okay maybe some background on the root of the problem would help.
    Windows XP (and Windows 2000) used a fast and great mechanism called Hotfix Installer (Update.exe) to install updates. Updates installed in very little time. If you wanted to further reduce update times on Windows XP, you could just temporarily stop the
    System Restore service and updates would install at crazy speeds. Note that this is not recommended for novice users who don't know advanced recovery methods, as some updates can sometimes cause your system to stop booting so you cannot even uninstall them.
    The method the Hotfix Installer used was simple, it just installed a new version of files to be updated at %windir%\system32 and %windir%\system32\dllcache (the Windows File Protection cache). For files that were in use, a restart copied them from dllcache
    to the system32 folder. This is simple file-based servicing. The hotfix installer (Update.exe) also supported various command line switches like /nobackup which means not to backup files it patches. Again, this is not recommended for novice users as some updates
    can screw your system even after the comprehensive testing Microsoft does before releasing them. But if you won't be uninstalling any updates (usually one only requires uninstalling updates if they cause problems), you could save a ton of disk space by not
    backing up the files it patched. The Hotfix Installer backed up files to C:\Windows\$Uninstall$KBxxxxxx folders so even if you did back up the files at install time, they could be safely deleted after a few days if no stability issues were found after using
    Windows with the newest updates applied. Update.exe also supported the very important and convenient ability to slipstream a service pack or update into the original Windows setup files using the /s switch.    
    When Microsoft was developing Windows Vista, they realized that components had gotten too many interdepencies on each other and to service each file reliably without breaking another component that relied on it, Microsoft introduced what they called as Component
    Based Servicing (CBS). You can read all about it in a much more technical way at The Servicing Guy's blog. What CBS does basically is it installs all files of the entire operating system, including all languages into C:\Windows\WinSxS and then it hard-links
    files from there to C:\Windows\system32. This has the benefit of not having to insert the OS disc to add or remove any components, and some other advantages as well like offline servicing of a Windows Vista or Windows 7 image. But the design introduces a major
    disadvantage of taking up a lot of hard disk space. Whenever an update is installed, it no longer installs it to C:\Windows\system32 and C:\Windows\system32\dllcache like Windows XP's hotfix installer (Update.exe) did. Instead, it updates the files in C:\Windows\WinSxS.
    Now, Windows keeps multiple copies of the same file but with different version in WinSxS if it is used by more than one Windows component. The higher the number of components, that many number of times the file exists in C:\Windows\WinSxS. When a Windows Vista
    update (.MSU) is installed, the components get updated, each and every one, instead of the files and the worst part is it still maintains the older superseded previous versions of components in WinSxS so the user would be able to uninstall updates. Microsoft
    does say that some sort of "scavenging" or deleting older copies of components takes place but is scarce on the details. The scavenging seems to take place automatically at certain intervals in Windows 7 but not in Windows Vista. In Windows Vista, you have
    to add or remove any Windows component for the scavenging to take place. And Microsoft says the scavenging will free up some disk space but in practice, on my system, I see my free disk space only decreasing on Vista as I remove or add any component. Windows
    does not give the user an option to not backup the earlier versions of components like Windows XP's /nobackup switch in Hotfix Installer did. As as you install more and more updates on your system, they will take more and more disk space. This is one of the
    primary reasons Windows Vista and Windows 7 are so bloated. Another reason for them being so bloated is the DriverStore that these OSes store. All drivers that are shipped with the OS and the OEM ones which you download and which are installed for a particular
    system are staged in C:\Windows\System32\DriverStore. But let's not go there for now.
    Now, an important thing to note is that the size of the WinSxS folder is not what Explorer or the dir command report, it is far less but is misreported by Explorer because it counts the hard links more than once when calculating size. That does not mean,
    the size of WinSxS is not causing real-world disk space problems on numerous Windows Vista/7 systems in use today. Microsoft's ingenious recommendation to this problem of ever growing disk consumption is to install fewer updates to keep the size of the servicing
    store under control. Of course, users cannot deny installing security updates and leave their system open to security holes. What they can do is install less optional updates, the ones that Microsoft releases on the fourth Tuesday of every month and also install
    less of the hotfixes that are available by request from a Knowledge Base article. In short, you have to trade the number of bugs fixed in the OS by installing hotfixes at the cost of enormous amounts of disk space. The whole servicing stack is a total downgrade
    to Windows XP's update.exe method. It causes heavy disk thrashing and slow logoffs/logons while Windows configures these updates at the Welcome Screen. Many systems are unable to boot because of failed updates. Another disadvantage of the "new" servicing stack
    (and the redesigned Setup mechanism of Windows Vista) is the inability to do a true slipstream of service packs and hotfixes.
    The time it takes to actually install these hotfixes online compared to Windows XP is also completely unacceptable. When you start installing an MSU update, it spends a lot of time determining whether the update applies to your system. Then, the update itself
    takes much longer to install compared to Windows XP's Update.exe (hours instead of minutes if you are installing dozens of updates through a script). Finally, that post-installation process ("Configuring updates... Do not turn off your computer") takes several
    minutes before shut down followed by a second post-installation process (configuration) upon restart before logon that also takes also several minutes and thrashes the disk.
    I can install the entire SP3 for Windows XP in about 10 minutes after downloading the full installer. I can also install a slipstreamed-with-SP3 copy of Windows XP is about 45 minutes on a modern fast PC. In contrast, Windows Vista or Windows 7 do install
    relatively quickly (in just about 15-20 minutes) on a modern PC but installing the service packs and updates takes more time than anything on XP did. Not only can service packs not be slipstreamed, but Vista Service Packs are not even cumulative, which means
    if you clean install Windows Vista today, you have to install SP1 first which takes about 90 minutes, then SP2 which takes less time, then all the post-SP2 updates which do take hours to install. If you really HAVE to use Windows 7 or Windows Vista, you are
    stuck with this slow update non-sense as Microsoft does not even acknowledge that there is any slowdown or loss of functionality in the new servicing mechanism. The fact remains: MSU updates are slow as **** and take too much time and as Windows 7/Vista get
    older and Microsoft stops producing service packs, a clean install is going to take longer and longer to bring it up-to-date with all patches installed. Is is worth wasting your time on an OS whose servicing mechanism Microsoft completely screwed up? I once
    again recommend you read more about the servicing stack and how it operates at The Servicing Guy's blog:http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/. To fix this messed up servicing stack, Microsoft also offers a tool
    called CheckSUR for your system if it finds “inconsistencies in the servicing store”.
    Microsoft's Windows Vista and Windows 7 products are not engineered with disk space in mind. It causes a problem, especially for SSDs which are still low capacity and very expensive. The only hope is that Microsoft again completely redesigns this servicing
    mechanism in a future Windows release so it would not cause this growing disk space consumption issue, speed up installation of updates by an order of magnitude, not slow down logon and logoff, not prevent systems becoming unusable because of failed updates
    being stuck at a particular stage and allow true slipstreaming.
    Microsoft's response to this is vague - they simply state "Windows 7's servicing is more reliable than Windows XP" but they cannot acknowledge it is a million times slower and still unreliable...slow to the point of being unusable and sometimes leaving systems
    in an unbootable damaged state. Of course they know all this too but can't admit it since it makes their latest OSes look poor. Moving from a very simple and fast update mechanism that worked to a complex one that requires endless “configuring” and repair
    through CheckSUR is a product engineering defect.
    Take a look at servicing-related complaints in Microsoft's own forums:
    1.
    Very slow install of updates to Windows 7
    2.
    Windows 7 - Updates are very slow
    3.
    Windows 7 Ultimate, it takes long time configuring updates
    4.
    "Preparing To Configure Windows. Please Do Not Turn Off Your Computer"
    5.
    Very slow update install at shutdown (Windows 7 Home Premium)
    6.
    Why does my computer run so slow when installing updates?
    7.
    Every time the computer is shut down, it always says installing update do not turn off your computer
    8.
    Computer is working slow and wants to do windows updates all the time
    9.
    Windows 7 Update install time taking a very long time
    10.
    Windows wants to install 6 updates every time I log off or put the computer in sleep mode
    11.
    Problem In Configuring Windows Updates at the time of Startup
    12.
    Computer really slow after latest updates
    13.
    Windows hangs up in "configuring updates"
    14.
    Why can't windows 7 install updates?
    15.
    Every time computer is shut down, receive Installing updates, do not shut off....
    16.
    How long does it take for the Windows 7 Home Premium updates take?
    17.
    Windows 7 "Installing Update 2 of 2" for 12 hours now
    18.
    Updates causes endless reboots
    19.
    Updates stuck installing for over 24 hrs. Computer does not boot
    20.
    Cannot load Windows 7 after installing 2 critical updates
    A proper solution to this problem would be to completely re-engineer and rewrite the servicing mechanism so it operates with the speed, reliability and pain-free operation of the XP servicing mechanism.
    I don't see this situation improving in Windows 8 either. Good luck with your Windows tablet taking hours to install service packs and updates. Now, do iPads take that long to install updates?
    So fact is Microsoft understates or conveniently hides the real system requirements to keep a Windows 7/Vista system running. System requirements are install time may be 15 GB of free disk space but over time, this number increasing is unacceptable, especially
    for people's SSDs which are running out of disk space!

  • How do I reduce the size of an AI CS6 file when saving as a pdf?

    I'm trying to save an ai file to a PDF to send to the printer but the file is huge. How can I reduce the size without losing quality? I have already rasterized my images and flattened the artwork. Thanks!

    How huge is huge?  Are all of the images Placed at 100% or have they been scaled?  What are the printer's requirements?  What are the physical dimensions of the file?  And, how are you creating the PDF?  There are a few ways to minimize size, starting with the file itself and the printer's requirements.  I find, sometimes, Exporting > TIFF > Open in Ps > Save As Photoshop PDF is helpful.  I also use Distiller which trims files nicely and is customizable.

Maybe you are looking for