Discussion:
Problem printing checks
Isaac Wingfield
2016-05-21 00:27:54 UTC
Permalink
I've just started using GnuCash, and noticed that there's a problem printing three-up checks using the form for "Quicken (™) Wallet Checks w/ side stub" -- the third check prints way too low on the page. Lots of fiddling around produced no solution, and searching the archive came up empty.

I've filed a bug report (#766200) and come up with an awkward work-around that involves two passes though the printer, but meanwhile, does anyone have a better solution?

thx

Isaac
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
John Morris
2016-05-21 01:24:54 UTC
Permalink
I don't use the check-printing features myself as I prefer to use electronic payments wherever I can. However, I did have to help my folks get this working when I migrated them from Quicken this year. As I recall, it was not difficult to create my own check definition that fit their checks (also from Intuit, but without the stub).

I had to create a reasonably named file with chk as the extension and store it in the checks folder inside GnuCash's settings folder (~/Library/Application Support/GnuCash on my MacBook Pro). I then filled that file with the check definition. It's short enough that it should not hurt anything to paste it here:

[Top]
Guid=689b886d28e8e8bef4ef9042e1d3b8ec
Title=Intuit Checks
Show_Grid=false
Show_Boxes=false
Rotation=0
Translation=0;0;

[Check Positions]
Height = 252.0
Names = Top;Middle;Bottom

[Check Items]
Type_1=PAYEE
Coords_1=72;108;
Type_2=DATE
Coords_2=504;72;
Type_3=AMOUNT_WORDS
Coords_3=36;131.40000000000001;
Type_4=AMOUNT_NUMBER
Coords_4=504;108;
Type_5=ADDRESS
Coords_5=720;0;
Type_6=NOTES
Coords_6=54;207;
Type_7=MEMO
Coords_7=720;0;
Type_8=SPLITS_AMOUNT
Coords_8=720;0;
Type_9=SPLITS_MEMO
Coords_9=720;0;
Type_10=SPLITS_ACCOUNT
Coords_10=720;0;

This is mostly copied from elsewhere (I don't recall the source), but the obvious changes are the lines that start with "Coords" and end with two numbers. I do recall that I had to add the "Names" field so I could tell it to print the top, middle, or bottom check. However, I later found that this was not necessary: Since the checks my folks use are horizontal on the portrait page, the checks go through equally well whether there is one, two or three checks on the page. They just have to tell GnuCash how many checks are on the first page if they are printing a few.


The problem I'm still having with check printing is that the directions in the wiki are not accurate for recent versions of GnuCash. I have not been able to print more than one check directly from the checkbook register. I can do it by executing a Find, but that is a bit too complicated for my folks. Fortunately, they don't mind printing one check at a time.

Best,
John
Post by Isaac Wingfield
I've just started using GnuCash, and noticed that there's a problem printing three-up checks using the form for "Quicken (™) Wallet Checks w/ side stub" -- the third check prints way too low on the page. Lots of fiddling around produced no solution, and searching the archive came up empty.
I've filed a bug report (#766200) and come up with an awkward work-around that involves two passes though the printer, but meanwhile, does anyone have a better solution?
thx
Isaac
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
David Reiser
2016-05-21 01:56:59 UTC
Permalink
What’s “way too low”? And is the second check half that much too low?

You might want to measure your check heights too. I just discovered that my 3-to-a-page wallet checks are not all the same height. They are 202, 206, and 203 points high. I print about 5 checks per year, so I hadn’t played with multiple checks per page since they added it to gnucash a while back.

If you find the quicken_wallet.chk file, open it with a text editor, modify the Height = 204.0 line, you’ll change the ‘gap’ between first, second, and third checks. I found that setting Height = 200.0 gives me much better results on the third check than the default 204.0.

In case you’re interested, wallet checks are ‘supposed’ to be 2 and 5/6 inches tall — based on the days when typewriters were in use and had a fixed 6 lines per inch vertical spacing. 2 and 5/6 inches x 72 points/inch = 204.0 points high. The fact that 200.0 works so much better suggests to me that there are one or more rounding errors in the page layout code for multiple forms/page cases.
--
Dave Reiser
Post by Isaac Wingfield
I've just started using GnuCash, and noticed that there's a problem printing three-up checks using the form for "Quicken (™) Wallet Checks w/ side stub" -- the third check prints way too low on the page. Lots of fiddling around produced no solution, and searching the archive came up empty.
I've filed a bug report (#766200) and come up with an awkward work-around that involves two passes though the printer, but meanwhile, does anyone have a better solution?
thx
Isaac
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Isaac Wingfield
2016-05-21 03:37:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Reiser
What’s “way too low”?
The third check prints about where a fourth would be, if there were four checks on the page.
Post by David Reiser
And is the second check half that much too low?
No. The second check is properly placed.
Post by David Reiser
If you find the quicken_wallet.chk file, open it with a text editor, modify the Height = 204.0 line, you’ll change the ‘gap’ between first, second, and third checks. I found that setting Height = 200.0 gives me much better results on the third check than the default 204.0.
I did that to get checks 1 and 2 properly positioned. Check 3 is way too low.

If you edit the quicken_wallet.chk file to "Show_Grid= true", then two grids appear, offset vertically. This seems wrong and, I believe, is related to the check #3 offset problem.

Isaac
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
David Reiser
2016-05-21 03:55:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Isaac Wingfield
Post by David Reiser
What’s “way too low”?
The third check prints about where a fourth would be, if there were four checks on the page.
Post by David Reiser
And is the second check half that much too low?
No. The second check is properly placed.
Post by David Reiser
If you find the quicken_wallet.chk file, open it with a text editor, modify the Height = 204.0 line, you’ll change the ‘gap’ between first, second, and third checks. I found that setting Height = 200.0 gives me much better results on the third check than the default 204.0.
I did that to get checks 1 and 2 properly positioned. Check 3 is way too low.
That’s way more pathological than anything I’ve seen. Sounds like somehow the page layout has created an additional grid. Any other changes to the .chk file? Still have only one Height line?
Post by Isaac Wingfield
If you edit the quicken_wallet.chk file to "Show_Grid= true", then two grids appear, offset vertically. This seems wrong and, I believe, is related to the check #3 offset problem.
Isaac
Dave
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Isaac Wingfield
2016-05-21 04:05:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Reiser
Post by Isaac Wingfield
Post by David Reiser
What’s “way too low”?
The third check prints about where a fourth would be, if there were four checks on the page.
Post by David Reiser
And is the second check half that much too low?
No. The second check is properly placed.
Post by David Reiser
If you find the quicken_wallet.chk file, open it with a text editor, modify the Height = 204.0 line, you’ll change the ‘gap’ between first, second, and third checks. I found that setting Height = 200.0 gives me much better results on the third check than the default 204.0.
I did that to get checks 1 and 2 properly positioned. Check 3 is way too low.
That’s way more pathological than anything I’ve seen. Sounds like somehow the page layout has created an additional grid.
That's what I think too. But I don't know where it is located, or how to fix it if I could find it.
Post by David Reiser
Any other changes to the .chk file? Still have only one Height line?
No, and yes. I did a lot of jiggering around with the .chk file, to get the data to align well with the pre-printed checks, so I'm pretty familiar with what's in it.

FWIW, my "fix" is to print the first two checks on a three-check sheet and then change to another .chk file and run the sheet through again to print the third check *as check #1* with a large value for "Translation" to position it where the third check is located on the page. Works, but requires two printer passes, which makes it error-prone.

That does tell me (I think) that the actual problem is in the routine that figures out where the third check goes. That might also explain the offset second grid, too ...

Isaac
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
David Reiser
2016-05-21 04:33:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Isaac Wingfield
Post by David Reiser
Post by Isaac Wingfield
Post by David Reiser
What’s “way too low”?
The third check prints about where a fourth would be, if there were four checks on the page.
Post by David Reiser
And is the second check half that much too low?
No. The second check is properly placed.
Post by David Reiser
If you find the quicken_wallet.chk file, open it with a text editor, modify the Height = 204.0 line, you’ll change the ‘gap’ between first, second, and third checks. I found that setting Height = 200.0 gives me much better results on the third check than the default 204.0.
I did that to get checks 1 and 2 properly positioned. Check 3 is way too low.
That’s way more pathological than anything I’ve seen. Sounds like somehow the page layout has created an additional grid.
That's what I think too. But I don't know where it is located, or how to fix it if I could find it.
Post by David Reiser
Any other changes to the .chk file? Still have only one Height line?
No, and yes. I did a lot of jiggering around with the .chk file, to get the data to align well with the pre-printed checks, so I'm pretty familiar with what's in it.
FWIW, my "fix" is to print the first two checks on a three-check sheet and then change to another .chk file and run the sheet through again to print the third check *as check #1* with a large value for "Translation" to position it where the third check is located on the page. Works, but requires two printer passes, which makes it error-prone.
Have you tried the Check Position pop-up in the Print Check dialog to select “Bottom” without the large translation? That selection might only appear if you’re printing one check from the full register rather than a found set. But if you’re only printing one check, it should work.

I generally only print one check at a time, so I tear off the one I’ve printed, and then pretend I’m printing at the top of a full page the next time. All the ink jet and laser printers I’ve had have no problem feeding the partial sheet. The third trip through a laser does sometimes leave a slight gray tinge on the check, though.
Post by Isaac Wingfield
That does tell me (I think) that the actual problem is in the routine that figures out where the third check goes. That might also explain the offset second grid, too ...
Isaac
If you’ve made a lot of changes to the .chk file, I’d be concerned that some change kicked the renderer into creating a second origin.

Dave


_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Isaac Wingfield
2016-05-21 04:39:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Reiser
Have you tried the Check Position pop-up in the Print Check dialog to select “Bottom” without the large translation? That selection might only appear if you’re printing one check from the full register rather than a found set. But if you’re only printing one check, it should work.
It prints one check in the "fourth" position.
Post by David Reiser
I generally only print one check at a time, so I tear off the one I’ve printed, and then pretend I’m printing at the top of a full page the next time. All the ink jet and laser printers I’ve had have no problem feeding the partial sheet. The third trip through a laser does sometimes leave a slight gray tinge on the check, though.
Friend wife, who actually does the accounting, wants the "stubs" along the side intact, do that won't work.
Post by David Reiser
Post by Isaac Wingfield
That does tell me (I think) that the actual problem is in the routine that figures out where the third check goes. That might also explain the offset second grid, too ...
Isaac
If you’ve made a lot of changes to the .chk file, I’d be concerned that some change kicked the renderer into creating a second origin.
It did that from the outset.

In particular, one check, one grid; two checks, one grid; three checks, two grids.

What do you see when you turn on the grid and print a three-check set? (Preview works too).

Isaac
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
David Reiser
2016-05-21 04:52:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Isaac Wingfield
Post by David Reiser
Have you tried the Check Position pop-up in the Print Check dialog to select “Bottom” without the large translation? That selection might only appear if you’re printing one check from the full register rather than a found set. But if you’re only printing one check, it should work.
It prints one check in the "fourth" position.
Post by David Reiser
I generally only print one check at a time, so I tear off the one I’ve printed, and then pretend I’m printing at the top of a full page the next time. All the ink jet and laser printers I’ve had have no problem feeding the partial sheet. The third trip through a laser does sometimes leave a slight gray tinge on the check, though.
Friend wife, who actually does the accounting, wants the "stubs" along the side intact, do that won't work.
Post by David Reiser
Post by Isaac Wingfield
That does tell me (I think) that the actual problem is in the routine that figures out where the third check goes. That might also explain the offset second grid, too ...
Isaac
If you’ve made a lot of changes to the .chk file, I’d be concerned that some change kicked the renderer into creating a second origin.
It did that from the outset.
In particular, one check, one grid; two checks, one grid; three checks, two grids.
What do you see when you turn on the grid and print a three-check set? (Preview works too).
Hmm. Looks like I have 3 grids, offset by about 0.05 inches vertically, and aligned perfectly horizontally.
Post by Isaac Wingfield
Isaac
Dave
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Isaac Wingfield
2016-05-21 05:02:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Reiser
Post by Isaac Wingfield
Post by David Reiser
Have you tried the Check Position pop-up in the Print Check dialog to select “Bottom” without the large translation? That selection might only appear if you’re printing one check from the full register rather than a found set. But if you’re only printing one check, it should work.
It prints one check in the "fourth" position.
Post by David Reiser
I generally only print one check at a time, so I tear off the one I’ve printed, and then pretend I’m printing at the top of a full page the next time. All the ink jet and laser printers I’ve had have no problem feeding the partial sheet. The third trip through a laser does sometimes leave a slight gray tinge on the check, though.
Friend wife, who actually does the accounting, wants the "stubs" along the side intact, do that won't work.
Post by David Reiser
Post by Isaac Wingfield
That does tell me (I think) that the actual problem is in the routine that figures out where the third check goes. That might also explain the offset second grid, too ...
Isaac
If you’ve made a lot of changes to the .chk file, I’d be concerned that some change kicked the renderer into creating a second origin.
It did that from the outset.
In particular, one check, one grid; two checks, one grid; three checks, two grids.
What do you see when you turn on the grid and print a three-check set? (Preview works too).
Hmm. Looks like I have 3 grids, offset by about 0.05 inches vertically, and aligned perfectly horizontally.
If you look very closely at the numbers at the left edge, do you see the same number printed twice with a slight offset, or two different numbers, maybe differing by 200? I see two different numbers.

Isaac
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Geert Janssens
2016-05-21 13:46:19 UTC
Permalink
I have committed a fix for this bug.

While looking at this I noted another positioning bug: the page
margin was added to each check position, instead of only once
per page.

If you have been manually correcting check formats, you may
have to undo/redo some of your adjustments once you start using
gnucash 2.6.13.

Regards,

Geert
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Geert Janssens
2016-05-21 12:36:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Isaac Wingfield
Post by David Reiser
What’s “way too low”?
The third check prints about where a fourth would be, if there were
four checks on the page.
Not related to the source of this bug however your comment makes me wonder: does your
check paper really provide 4 checks or was that just a way to describe the position where the
last check is printed ?

If there are really 4 checks on your paper, the check format is also wrong as it only defines 3
positions.


As for the original issue: I have found the problem (I introduced it myself in 2.6.12 :( ) and will
commit a fix soon.

The current situation is that gnucash 2.6.12 will work correctly if you only have one check to
print (from an ordinary register for example), but gets the positions wrong when printing
multiple checks at once (when printing from a search).
Gnucash 2.6.11 does the exact opposite. So depending on what you do most either version is
recommended.
Gnucash 2.6.13 will work correctly for both cases.

Regards,

Geert
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or
Isaac Wingfield
2016-05-21 16:06:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Isaac Wingfield
Post by David Reiser
What’s “way too low”?
The third check prints about where a fourth would be, if there were
four checks on the page.
Not related to the source of this bug however your comment makes me wonder: does your check paper really provide 4 checks or was that just a way to describe the position where the last check is printed ?
The page only has three checks, with a blank area at the bottom. My use of "fourth" was intended to give an idea of how much too low the third one prints.

Isaac
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
Geert Janssens
2016-05-21 16:20:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Isaac Wingfield
Post by Geert Janssens
Post by Isaac Wingfield
Post by David Reiser
What’s “way too low”?
The third check prints about where a fourth would be, if there were
four checks on the page.
Not related to the source of this bug however your comment makes me
wonder: does your check paper really provide 4 checks or was that
just a way to describe the position where the last check is printed
?
The page only has three checks, with a blank area at the bottom. My
use of "fourth" was intended to give an idea of how much too low the
third one prints.
Isaac
Thanks, then it should work with my fix now.

Regards,

Geert
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List
David Reiser
2016-05-21 18:38:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Isaac Wingfield
Post by David Reiser
What’s “way too low”?
The third check prints about where a fourth would be, if there were
four checks on the page.
Not related to the source of this bug however your comment makes me wonder: does your check paper really provide 4 checks or was that just a way to describe the position where the last check is printed ?
If there are really 4 checks on your paper, the check format is also wrong as it only defines 3 positions.
As for the original issue: I have found the problem (I introduced it myself in 2.6.12 :( ) and will commit a fix soon.
The current situation is that gnucash 2.6.12 will work correctly if you only have one check to print (from an ordinary register for example), but gets the positions wrong when printing multiple checks at once (when printing from a search).
Gnucash 2.6.11 does the exact opposite. So depending on what you do most either version is recommended.
Gnucash 2.6.13 will work correctly for both cases.
Regards,
Geert
Ah. That explains why I couldn’t duplicate the problem. I stayed on 2.6.11 because I missed the fact that the price editor bug doesn’t affect OS X. And I never use the Bottom check position. I always start printing at Top whether there are 3, 2, or 1 checks left on the first page.

Thanks for the fix.

Dave
--
Dave Reiser
***@icloud.com





_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-***@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or R

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...