Well, I actually tried to see it but gv (Fedora Core 2)
> chokes on the file: CPU utilization goes to 100% after
> displaying the axes, labels, and a tiny bit of the
> graph. I killed it after a while.
I had the same problem with ggv (but I converted it with ps2pdf and
viewed it as pdf). What are you using as a PS viewer Paul?
One thing that concerns about embedding truetype fonts in PS figures
is that they don't look very good in standard viewers (xdvi, ggv)
though they seem to print fine, at least on the printers I've tried.
It may be that the viewers don't have very good truetype rendering
algorithms.
I'm on the fence about whether we should revert to the afm fonts for
plain text in PS, and just use truetype for mathtext and if
explicitly requested using a yet-to-be-determined mechanism. These
certainly look better in the PS viewers I've tried. Of course the
truetype fonts offer the same look and feel across backends, which is
why I am on the fence. Any opinions here?
> Are there known problems with the Postscript generated
> by matplotlib? Can it produce EPS directly (better for
> publication)?
EPS: yes - just save as *.eps from just about any backend.
The only reported problem I've heard was a post from Flavio Coelho
While on the same topic, I had some problems inserting matplotlib
generated PS plots into TeXMacs, although they open normally in gv,
for instance. have you have seen any compatibility issues for the PS
files and other PS viewing programs? Running ps2ps on the
matplotlib PS files resolved the problem. However I wanted to use
TexMacs as a frontend to use matplotlib interactively...
Paul, so we could help narrow this problem with gv and your figure,
could you try generating it with 0.60.2 (which uses AFM if I recall
correctly) to see if it is related to the new font handling in PS?
Thanks,
JDH
John Hunter wrote:
"Fernando" == Fernando Perez <Fernando.Perez@...76...> writes:
> Well, I actually tried to see it but gv (Fedora Core 2)
> chokes on the file: CPU utilization goes to 100% after
> displaying the axes, labels, and a tiny bit of the
> graph. I killed it after a while.
I had the same problem with ggv (but I converted it with ps2pdf and
viewed it as pdf). What are you using as a PS viewer Paul?
GGV (i.e. Gnome ghostview)
One thing that concerns about embedding truetype fonts in PS figures
is that they don't look very good in standard viewers (xdvi, ggv)
though they seem to print fine, at least on the printers I've tried.
It may be that the viewers don't have very good truetype rendering
algorithms.
It might also be the standard fonts that we use. In other words, there might be other truetype fonts that render better with freetype2.
I'm on the fence about whether we should revert to the afm fonts for
plain text in PS, and just use truetype for mathtext and if
explicitly requested using a yet-to-be-determined mechanism. These
certainly look better in the PS viewers I've tried. Of course the
truetype fonts offer the same look and feel across backends, which is
why I am on the fence. Any opinions here?
I don't see a gain here, since PS output is mainly for printing where the fonts look fine. Maybe we should invest more effort in a PDF backend, which displays better in a viewer and also does the conversion to PS. Or switch to TTF that render better in a viewer, such as the core MS TT fonts.
> Are there known problems with the Postscript generated
> by matplotlib? Can it produce EPS directly (better for
> publication)?
EPS: yes - just save as *.eps from just about any backend.
The only reported problem I've heard was a post from Flavio Coelho
While on the same topic, I had some problems inserting matplotlib
generated PS plots into TeXMacs, although they open normally in gv,
for instance. have you have seen any compatibility issues for the PS
files and other PS viewing programs? Running ps2ps on the
matplotlib PS files resolved the problem. However I wanted to use
TexMacs as a frontend to use matplotlib interactively...
Paul, so we could help narrow this problem with gv and your figure,
could you try generating it with 0.60.2 (which uses AFM if I recall
correctly) to see if it is related to the new font handling in PS?
I'll take a look at it. However, I suspect the fonts are not the problem, since each font only increases the size of the PS file by about 60 kBs. I suspect it is the size of the data and the rendering code that is causing the problem.
-- Paul
···
--
Paul Barrett, PhD Space Telescope Science Institute
Phone: 410-338-4475 ESS/Science Software Branch
FAX: 410-338-4767 Baltimore, MD 21218