Hello! Florian Friesdorf <[email protected]> skribis:
> doc-view with/without imagemagick > --------------------------------- > > Viewing a pdf first with the imagemagick version, the optical result > is bad (especially when zooming in). Opening/closing, navigating around > does not change that. > > Viewing then without imagemagick, the optical result is good. Zooming in > still yields nicely rendered vector fonts. Also emacs remembers the zoom > level of the file (this is not the case with imagemagick). > > Now the weird part: opening with imagemagick again, the optical quality > is the same as without it. It seems that previews were stored somewhere. > > @Ludo: any ideas? Where did you see performance differences? There’s a cache under /tmp/docview$UID, so you should remove it before comparing the optical quality. It’s not clear to me why there’d be any difference in terms of quality. What I observed is that, before, you would see it convert the next few pages while you’re reading (which could be seen in the modeline), and it could take some time; each time you would zoom in or out, it would possibly start again. Now, it’s snappier: pages are rendered almost instantaneously, even when zooming. > Is emacs24 with or without imagemagick better (independent of size)? We’d have to ask emacs-devel for more technical insight, I guess. > In case of "with imagemagick", does it justify 81MB? I think so, because ImageMagick is available in my store anyway. Thanks, Ludo’. _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
