[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: BOUNCE docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org: Approval required:
There is a Ghostscript6.01 out too. Phill Norman Walsh wrote: > Approved: turnip > Received: from starglo.research.oneworld.com (xXoGfnhFyAbKP2plKDBK8ad5TeqxwNO0@starglo.research.oneworld.com [143.227.3.18]) > by oasis.oasis-open.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA29063 > for <docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 18:49:21 -0400 (EDT) > Received: from starglo.research.oneworld.com (IDENT:YyQoymEehfnD89ol1WahQVL4qPV9hyP4@localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by starglo.research.oneworld.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA07962; > Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:49:19 -0700 (PDT) > Message-Id: <200007112249.PAA07962@starglo.research.oneworld.com> > To: "Kevin M. Dunn" <kevinmd@hsc.edu> > cc: docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: Re: DOCBOOK-APPS: Creating or converting PDF images > In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 11 Jul 2000 17:09:12 EDT." > <396B8CF8.C3464303@hsc.edu> > Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:49:19 -0700 > From: rosss@research.oneworld.com > > > I didn't convert at all, just used your png file directly. The quality looks > > identical to that of your original file. But > > ImageMagick does assume 72 dpi unless you tell it otherwise. Check out: > > cator.hsc.edu/~kmd/docbook/test/rosss.sgml > > cator.hsc.edu/~kmd/docbook/test/rosss.dsl > > cator.hsc.edu/~kmd/docbook/test/rosss.pdf > > cator.hsc.edu/~kmd/docbook/test/png-support-3.1.dtd > > > > Thanks a ton Kevin, although when I view your PDF (on either Unix or > Windows), I'm seeing the same (poor) image quality I'm getting. If > you compare > > http://zaius.chimpware.com/~rosss/sample.png > > with either of the images on page 5 of your PDF at > > http://cator.hsc.edu/~kmd/docbook/test/rosss.pdf > > you'll see that the PDF version is different than my PNG. It's got > extra pixels, the text is kind of goofy, and it just looks "funny" > compared to the original PNG screenshot. It's like it's been shrunk > or stretched, but without being resampled so it's just lost or gained > pixels randomly. > > Anyway, your PDF has exactly the same problem as what I've been getting. > > What tools are you using? > > Does anybody know if Ghostscript is involved with this process at all? > I'm running GNU Ghostscript 5.10, and noticed that there's a 5.50 > version out... > > Thanks for everybody's help and patience. > > Sean Ross > Corvallis, Oregon, USA > rosss@research.oneworld.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC