PDF Problem

[Steve Schow]

 Ok, here's a question.  I know this question comes up occasionally.  I
have been one of the people bringing it up.  Why do lilypond PDF's look
crappy on-screen, even though they print fine?  particularly on windows.

Here is a simple example.  This screen shot is from around page 15 of the
lilypond pdf manual, as displayed on my computer:

http://www.nabble.com/file/p11699420/ScreenHunter_05%2BJul.%2B19%2B15.55.jpg 

here is an example I created with current stable Lilypond:

http://www.nabble.com/file/p11699420/ScreenHunter_04%2BJul.%2B19%2B15.53.jpg 

Notice that some stems and barlines are thicker than others.  Also, the
spacing between staff lines does not appear to be consistent to me.

Those were both displayed at 100% in adobe reader 8.x

Can anything be done to improve it?  I don't know enough about
postscript to analyze it and find the culprit postscript code.  But I
sure wish someone who does know would figure it out.

here is some more background that my help:

1 - I have had the same problem on Windows Finale for years

2 - On Mac Finale, the PDF's produced through built in OSX support look
great on screen, and the same PDF's can be viewed on windows and also
look great there.  On windows finale, the PDF's produced look terrible,
no matter which machine you use to view it.  So in other words, there is
something about the PDF creation process on the Mac that creates a PDF
which can be viewed well on screen on both the Mac and Windows. 
However, something about the windows PDF creation process that doesn't
look acceptable on screen.

3 - I found out a work-around for #2 on windows.  If I use the "Compile
Postscript Listing" command in Finale to render the entire score as a
postscript file.  Then I exit Finale and use Ghostscript to convert the
ps file into a PDF file, then I end up with an excellent PDF which views
well both on screen and print.  

4 - This leads me to believe that the main reason the WinFinale PDF's
were having a hard time is because Finale was not sending the "ideal"
postscript to the printer driver.  It must be sending some other generic
vector information and then letting the printer driver create postscript
if it makes sense to.  A finale expert explained to me that Finale
actually sends significantly different stuff to the printer driver than
what it compiles into a ps file.  For example, beams are comprised of
many small lines next to each other, for some silly reason, as opposed
to one thick slanted line that can be done in postscript.  In any case,
what I have found is that I take the "ideal" postscript compliation from
finale and use that to create a PDF with ghostscript, it works just fine
and I end up with a beautiful PDF on screen.

5 - Knowing the above, I try to do the same with lilypond, convert the
ps file manually with ghostscript, which is sort of a moot point since
that is what lilypond does normally anyway, and the PDF's still look bad
on screen.  

6 - For whatever its worth, when I use a ghostscript-based print driver
to create PDF's with Overture, they look just fine on screen and print,
and that is without any special postscript rendering first or anything. 
Overture does not understand anything about postscript like Finale does.
 So it is sending whatever it sends to the printer as generic print
commands.  And ghostscript creates PDF's from it that blow away both
Lilypond and Finale when used that way.  I only mention this to show
that it *IS* possible.  

7 - I have tried Adobe distiller as well and it produces exactly the
same results as ghostscript.  No better, no worse.  Just more expensive
option and perhaps more complicated to use compared to the freebies that
are based on ghostscript.

Anyone have any thoughts?  Any work-arounds for making PDF's from
lilypond that look good on screen AND print(not including generating PNG
files, etc.???

thanks
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/PDF-Problem-tf4114229.html#a11699420
Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.