On Monday 12 April 2004 12:50 am, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
> "Joao S. O. Bueno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > So far, all you need seems to resolve if the plug-in
> > can just remember the last values used.
> >
> > I will see for that. Meanwhile, feel free to check
> > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138583
> > and add your comments - it is were I am keeping track
> > of the enhancements I plan to make for the postscript
> > plug-in.
Noted. I am even willing to hard code a different set of 
default values if that is available. 

> None of your enhancement solve the real problem here
> which is that Postscript is the wrong file format. GIMP
> will never be able to handle Postscript files good enough
> that one would attempt to use GIMP to open and manipulate
> them. With your changes, GIMP will be able to create
> better Postscript files, but that still doesn't make
> Postscript the right format for storing scanned image
> data.
> Perhaps it would be better to remove that kludge of
> calling GS to be able to open Postscript files and make
> the postscript plug-in write-only. Way too many users are
> tricked into believing that GIMP would be able to
> manipulate Postscript files.

Well, I use Gimp and its Postscript plug-in in the following 

A. I scan a page of music with Xsane, saving the result 
as .ps.
B. I bring the page into Gimp with my favorite valuesb (see 
earlier post.)
C. I modify the image with Gimp doing things like:
 1. Cut and paste.
 2. Resize page.
 3. Rotate the page a fraction of a degree to correct for 
 4. Adjust curve to minimize gray areas caused by the book 
not lying flat on the scanner. 
D. I save the result with zero offset as an eps image.

Now I could of course scan to an pnm or png image instead of 
Postscript. (I could still save as Postscript from Gimp.) 
Which would be preferable for input to Gimp, pnm or png? 

(In earlier Gimps I could of course scan directly from Xsane 
into Gimp but this option disappeared with Gimp 1.3/2.0 and 
an early reappearance seems unlikely. )

The resulting EPS file will eventually be combined with 
other files of a similar nature using TeX and PSUtils to 
set up a booklet. For years I have used plain TeX and the 
EPS format. If I change to pdftex then my format choices 
are (currently) pdf, png, and jpeg. My library of several 
hundred scanned pages would have to be converted to pdf.

As a point of interest, some pages in my workflow are not 
scanned but are created by the mup music typesetting  
program. These are also in PostScript form. Since they are 
true typeset PostScript and not a bitmapped image they are 
about 10% as large as the comparable scanned image 
presented as a ps file. 

To summarize, I can scan to png or pnm instead of PostScript 
and import that into Gimp. But I need eps output for my 
present method. If I switch to pdftex then I could utilize 
png output. 

Are there advantages to using e.g., png throughout?  


John Culleton
Able Typesetters and Indexers

Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to