> I installed, with the help of a friend, the AdobeSongStd-Light.otf.
> I understand this to be unorthodox, as no Type 1 is be involved.
> Whether that might be of importance I am not sure.
This is fine. On the other hand, it's a bad idea to call the Adobe
font `gbsn' within LaTeX since this normally means the Arphic variant.
You should rename them.
> I noted that the PDF file (attached) my system generated is much
> smaller than yours.
Yes, you are using a single OpenType font, not a bunch of Type 1
subfonts (dvipdfmx maps the TeX subfont TFMs back to this single
OpenType font). This gives smaller output.
> I further attach my log file and a tree output of my ~/texmf which I
> hope to be useful.
Doing `pdffonts CJKutf8-ex2gut.pdf' you can see the following output
(`pdffonts' is part of the xpdf bundle; similar information can be
retrieved directly within acroread, for example):
name type emb sub uni object ID
-------------------------------- ------------- --- --- --- ---------
AdobeSongStd-Light-Identity-H CID Type 0 no no no 5 0
[none] Type 3 yes no no 6 0
As can be seen, the non-CJK font is represented as a Type 3 font!
This effectively means that you have an embedded bitmap font which
always looks bad if displayed on screen. For reasons unknown to me,
dvipdfmx doesn't use the Type 1 versions of the OT1 (or T1) fonts. It
seems that you have either misconfigured your TeX installation, or the
appropriate CM (or EC) fonts are only available as Metafont fonts.
Werner
_______________________________________________
Cjk maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.ffii.org/mailman/listinfo/cjk
