Re: PostScript Background Color Preference [message #73605 is a reply to message #73604] |
Wed, 17 November 2010 08:18  |
Paul Van Delst[1]
Messages: 1157 Registered: April 2002
|
Senior Member |
|
|
David Fanning wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I tout in my new graphics commands (FSC_Plot, FSC_Contour, etc.)
> that they "look the same on your display and in a PostScript file".
> But, of course, that's only true if you always use, as I tend
> to, white backgrounds for your graphical output. The joke, of
> course, is that you can have any background color you like
> in PostScript, as long as it's white.
>
> This is not true, you *can* have different colored
> backgrounds in PostScript, but you do have to go to
> some trouble to get them.
>
> Here is my question. I can produce different background colors in
> PostScript in my new graphics commands, but is this what people
> want and expect? My reasoning is that if I use a command and I write
> BACKGROUND='rose', and I want a command that "works everywhere",
> then I should expect a rose colored background everywhere.
>
> But, I can't quite pull the trigger on this. For some reason,
> it's doesn't feel like *exactly* what I want, even with all
> the big talk. What do you think? What would you want?
If I set the background colour explicitly, I expect it to always use that background colour, as with your "rose"
example. So if I do BACKGROUND='black', I expect my printer to go through a lot of toner. Nothing enrages me more than
technology that asks what I want (in this case via a keyword), and then ignores what I tell it. Grrrr.... :o)
For default, I'm happy with either a white (ala NG graphics) or black (ala DG graphics) background onscreen - which I
interpret as effectively "transparent" so that printouts will be as one expects. I would recommend you adopt a white
background so you're seen as being aligned with the bright and sunny future direction of graphics in IDL (i.e. NG)
:oD
cheers,
paulv
|
|
|