| Re: Religious Wars [message #78070 is a reply to message #78064] |
Tue, 25 October 2011 01:22   |
lecacheux.alain
Messages: 325
Registered: January 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 25 oct, 01:19, Manodeep Sinha <manod...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 24, 5:29 pm, Paul van Delst <paul.vande...@noaa.gov> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>> David Fanning wrote:
>>> Folks,
>
>>> I am not trying to start a religious war here, but I
>>> have some reason to believe the software Mac owners
>>> use to view PostScript files is screwy. :-)
>
>>> Or maybe it's Windows user's software, I don't know.
>>> I'm just trying to get to the bottom of a perplexing
>>> problem.
>
>> Probably windows.... (see below)
>
>>> The issue concerns encapsulated PostScript files. Here
>>> are two encapsulated PostScript files:
>
>>> http://www.idlcoyote.com/misc/a_orig.eps
>>> http://www.idlcoyote.com/misc/a_modified.eps
>
>>> If I open these files on my Windows machine, using the
>>> latest version of GSView (a GUI to GhostScript), then
>>> the a_orig.eps file looks perfect as long as I modify the
>>> GSView view to landscape orientation. If I view the
>>> a_modified.eps file, the output looks cut off at the far
>>> end in both portrait and landscape orientations.
>
>> On my linux box (RHE5), the file a_orig.eps is all screwy (no matter what orientation I choose in kghostview), and the
>> file a_modified.eps looks just fine.
>
> Same results on my linux box (RHE5 as well - so no big surprise here).
> gv does not display a_orig.eps properly (regardless of orientation);
> however, if I toggle the BBox button and select an A4 page-size, then
> I can see the plot. Running eps2eps on a_orig.eps also worked -- only
> the orientation needs to be changed in this case and not the BBox
> setting. a_modified.eps works fine with default gv settings.
>
> Cheers,
> Manodeep
>
>
>
>
>
>>> Oddly enough, Mac users find these results, too, but
>>> for the opposite files!!!
>
>> So, if I read correctly, my linux results agrees with the mac ones.
>
>> Gotta luv them anecdotal data points... :o)
>
>> cheers,
>
>> paulv
>
>>> If I put these documents in, say, Google Docs, then
>>> Google appears to agree with the Windows outlook
>>> on things. Of course, if I put them in Windows documents
>>> (Word, Framemaker, etc.) they agree with the Windows
>>> outlook, too. In fact, the only thing that *doesn't*
>>> agree with the Windows outlook, that I have been able
>>> to find in my experimenting, are Macintosh applications.
>
>>> So, here is my question. Is this a religious war? Should
>>> these eggs be broken on the big end or the little end?
>
>>> Any help greatly appreciated!
>
>>> Cheers,
>
>>> David- Masquer le texte des messages précédents -
>
> - Afficher le texte des messages précédents -- Masquer le texte des messages précédents -
>
> - Afficher le texte des messages précédents -
If you look at both PS source files, you can find that the 'orig' file
contains a "portrait" plot (BoundingBox 0 0 437 712) within a
"landscape" page (PageOrientation:Landscape, PageBoundingBox 180 75
437 712) on which some translation/rotation of the plot (180 rotate
-612 -792 translate) has been done, while the 'modified' file contains
a "landscape" plot (BoundingBox 0 0 712 437) within a "portrait" page
(PageOrientation:Portrait, PageBoundingBox 0 0 712 437) [note, here,
the amazing contradiction: "portrait" and X > Y !) without any further
operation.
In addition IDL, in creating these files, has added the somewhat
cryptic statements
'orig': $IDL_DICT begin 0 752 translate 0.0283465 dup scale 270
rotate MITERLIMIT
'modified': $IDL_DICT begin 0.0283465 dup scale MITERLIMIT
What a mess !
I love those "standard file formats" like PostScript...
alx.
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
