> 2008/11/13 Peter Nermander <peter at nermander.se>: >> It is useful to know that Scribus (as far as I know) uses >> ghostscript for >> this import. To see if the file renders correctly by ghostscript you >> could >> use gv or GhostView. >> >> If they can not show it correctly, Scribus can not rasterize it >> correctly. > Well, that's why i'm worrying. > > A little "test", one bar "music": > PS by LilyPond: http://brownian.org.ua/plain/scribus/first-barno.ps > (468K) > PDF by LilyPond: http://brownian.org.ua/plain/scribus/first-barno.pdf > (20K) > > PS was imported into Scribus document and exported as PDF: > http://brownian.org.ua/plain/scribus/first-barno-scribus.pdf (17K) > > Note stems... So, first two files look good in ghostview, kpdf etc. > and acroread.
Yes, but if you magnify the imported ps in the Scribus document, the irregularity is in the ps import. Exporting that as a PDF faithfully reproduces the ps irregularity Maybe a faulty ps importer for Scribus. Okular when importing the ps into pdf does the same. I tried importing it into Lyx, but subsequent processing generated an "Unable to determine size" error. Maybe there is a clue? Perhaps it is a Lilypond oddity? Scribus 1.3.5svn and GS 8.63
