On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Troy Henderson <thend...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am writing because there appears to be a very large (i.e., > approximately a factor of 10) difference in filesizes of the same > MetaPost graphic generated in the following 2 ways > > (1) Including a common MetaPost source "common.mp" into a minimal MKIV > document and compiling with `context surface.tex` > (2) Including the same "common.mp" into a minimal MetaPost source file > and compiling with `mpost surface.mp` followed by a `epstopdf > surface.mps`. > > In case (1), the resulting PDF is about 445kB whereas in case (2) the > resulting PDF is about 45kB. I've attached the "surface.tex", > "surface.mp", and "common.mp" for those that wish to test this and > help determine why ConTeXt's output is so much larger than > MetaPost+epstopdf. > > Thanks in advance for the help.
surface.mps 456543 bytes surface.pdf 455544 bytes context mkiv "include" surface.mps (include is not not the exact term); open surface.pdf with and editor and compare with surface.mps. epstopdf compress surface.eps, and if you bzip2 surface.eps you will have almost the same size. -- luigi ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
