Hello Andre, Thank you for your report.
> I am curriuos about the following: > > I did some tests about musixpss. I compiled 'Die beste Zeit' on the standard way > as explained in the > html file: > The file diebeste.ps (made with dvips) is 102Kb. > diebeste.pdf (made by dvipdf) is 70 Kb (this one is on the Icking site) > diebeste.pdf (made by pspdf) is 39 Kb > > I used also the second method (omitting the last TeX pass): > The file diebeste.ps (made with dvips) is 102Kb. > diebeste.pdf (made by dvipdf) has nos slurs, off course > diebeste.pdf (made by pspdf) is 39 Kb > > My question is: why is the dvipdf made file larger than the pspdf made file ? > > Thanks for reading all this > > Andre Perhaps there will be some internal structure difference of PDF file because of the process, in spite of their simillarity of appearance on paper and screen. I don't know about dvipdf (I suppose it is a different dviware from dvipdfm), and pspdf (also not dvips+ghostscript). But, I have got similar phenonema to this in making PDFs by dvipdfm versus by dvips+ghostscript. Not only file size but also internal structure of PDF seems quite different between the two. (I am not familiar to PS and PDF language; It is just viewing PDFs forcely with a text editor.) Try to change display magnification ratio on Acrobat Reader into 100%, 200%, 400%, and so on, and you'll find the line width of staff sometimes varies in 1 (or 2?) pixel, in case of PDF generated by dvips+ghostscript. dvipdfm is free from this. The filesize of dvi would also be different. General mode generates a bit larger dvi. Anyway I thank you your giving me the fact: dvipdf : OK with general mode pspdf : OK with general and dvips-optimized mode Best regards, ---- Hiroaki MORIMOTO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ TeX-music mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sunsite.dk/mailman/listinfo/tex-music
