Could someone post short comparative examples that illustrate the better screen rendering and smaller pdf's from pdftex and dvipdfm vs gsview32?
Here is one completely uncontrived example I accidentally stumbled across today that highlights one of the shortcomings of the bitmapped slurs. Here they are clearly too unsymmetrical. http://www.geocities.com/pchpublish/slurbm.pdf http://www.geocities.com/pchpublish/slurps.pdf And BTW (although not exactly on point) note that slurbm.pdf is 38% bigger than slurps.pdf. Both were made with gsview32. --Don Simons >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:tex-music- >[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jean-Pierre Coulon >Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 12:16 AM >To: Werner Icking Music Archive >Subject: Re: [TeX-Music] M-TX 0.60c compile problem > >On Sun, 16 Mar 2008, Christian Mondrup wrote: > >> [...] >> Here is one: postscript slurs/ties/hair-pins exclude the use of pdftex >> and dvipdfm (they both refuse to handle 'postscript specials'). I >prefer >> the pdf result of these utilities rather than tha of ps2pdf due to >> superior screen rendering. I'm aware, though, that the poorer screen >> rendering of ps2pdf doesn't influence hardcopy printing. > >And with MiKTeX, dvips+ps2pdf make significantly smaller .pdf files than >either dvipdfm or pdftex in musixtex.bat. > >Regards, > >Jean-Pierre Coulon [EMAIL PROTECTED] >_______________________________________________ >TeX-music mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://mailman.daimi.au.dk/mailman/listinfo/tex-music _______________________________________________ TeX-music mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.daimi.au.dk/mailman/listinfo/tex-music
