From: Arjen M. <arj...@wl...> - 2008-10-06 15:01:53
|
Steve Schwartz wrote: >On Mon, 2008-10-06 at 13:48 +0200, Arjen Markus wrote: > > >>I do not know if this will be a disappointment for you, but when I >>printed via the humble lp command on an OCE printer we have here, it >>comes out just fine. I am not sure about the margins (some of my >>colleagues are rather keen on getting the fine details right), but it >>is a very presentable picture. >> >> > >This neither disappoints nor surprises very much, though it does >frustrate. > > > >>Now, what does that tell us about the nature of the problem? It may be >>the "e" part (no fixed bounds, IIUIC)... >> >> > >I wondered that, though running it through eps2eps leaves it an eps >file, but that one behaves for me. And it should have some idea about >scale, size, resolution, ... and the bounding box at the beginning gives >the origin relative to something. [I might have expected it not >necessarily to have the right origin - and have encountered similar >problems in the past, but I would expect a ps or eps to know what an >inch was.] > >Thanks for retaining interest this long... > > NP - I have been wandering around in this particular territory long enough to know the frustration it brings. But you mentioning inches ... Could that be the cause? PS coordinates are usually in points - 1/72th of an inch. I am a firm believer of the SI units, but could a mistake of cm instead of inches or the other way around cause the unfortunate scaling? Regards, Arjen |