Re: Viewing and Printing PostScript Files [message #74024 is a reply to message #74023] |
Thu, 16 December 2010 12:42   |
Paul Van Delst[1]
Messages: 1157 Registered: April 2002
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hello,
JM wrote:
>> PDF, by its nature, is not very amenable to be embedded in other
>> things. That is the whole point of the E in EPS (encapsulated).
>
> Perhaps on other platforms, but definitely not so on Mac OS X. The OS
> X imaging system has a layer that "correlates well with the PDF object
> graph". What it means is, you can drop PDF graphics with ease into
> Pages, Keynote and Omnigraffle. And compiling a TeX document is much,
> much quicker if the referenced graphics are already PDF - the graphics
> are just "stitched-in" to the compiled PDF rather than having to be
> distilled from EPS.
What tex/latex graphics package do you use to include the files in your tex docs? Without changing anything in my
document preamble, I just replaced my usual .eps plot file with a .pdf one (generated from v8 "Function Graphics") in my
tex file and the quality of the result was terrible. I've obviously done something wrong somewhere.
I'm on linux by the way.
> A neat trick that you can do with any PDF document (or graphic) is, in
> Preview, select any rectangular region, cmd-C to copy it to the paste
> buffer. Then, in say, Keynote, cmd-V and the object appears -- full
> PDF (i.e. vector) character preserved. This also means that graphics
> are *not* degraded in any way at all. It really is a breeze to
> produce consistently high-quality PDF copy, and I can't imagine any
> one who can freely choose [1] opting for something less.
> [1] Stasi-like IT support notwithstanding.
Disregarding the usual inertia, I think the policy makers and bean counters have more to say about it than the IT folks.
Just my opinion of course, and not meant to represent any position of my employer(s).
cheers,
paulv
|
|
|