Printing and fonts under windows(98) 
Author Message
 Printing and fonts under windows(98)

Hi Folks,

A question for you printing/postscript gurus out there - how do I make
sure that the fonts I can place on a canvas can actually be printed?

I am currently creating a canvas, using the postcript file output
option to create an EPS file, and sending the result to a PostScript
printer with the most excellent PrintFile package that has been
mentioned on a number of occasions in this group.

However, the only matches in font terms that I can get seem to be
"Arial" and "Times", in whatever size
If I try to use another font - say "Comic Sans MS" - the canvas gets
it right, but it always ends up as "Courier" when the printer prints
it out...

Is this a W*ndoze specific font thing? - how do I make my output look
a little better ? (i.e. Arial's nice, but a bit boring :) )

Thanks,

Youra.



Sun, 04 May 2003 03:00:00 GMT  
 Printing and fonts under windows(98)

  In a message on Wed, 15 Nov 2000 08:24:16 GMT, wrote :

YT> Hi Folks,
YT>
YT> A question for you printing/PostScript gurus out there - how do I make
YT> sure that the fonts I can place on a canvas can actually be printed?
YT>
YT> I am currently creating a canvas, using the postcript file output
YT> option to create an EPS file, and sending the result to a PostScript
YT> printer with the most excellent PrintFile package that has been
YT> mentioned on a number of occasions in this group.
YT>
YT> However, the only matches in font terms that I can get seem to be
YT> "Arial" and "Times", in whatever size
YT> If I try to use another font - say "Comic Sans MS" - the canvas gets
YT> it right, but it always ends up as "Courier" when the printer prints
YT> it out...

First, you can set up the font mapping with the -fontmap option under
the canvas postscript command.

Second, normally, there is only a fixed (limited) set of *standard*
('builtin') PostScript fonts.  Additional fonts need to be downloaded
(doable, but not really trivial).  I know that "Comic Sans MS" is not a
*standard* ('builtin') PostScript font, so the canvas postscript command
is going to make a guess -- -fontmap can help, but you probably won't
get exactly the right thing.

The canvas postscript command *DOES NOT* do an image scan of the canvas
object.  It actually re-draws the canvas contents uses PostScript
graphic commands.  This includes any text.  Only bitmaps and images are
image scanned.  In other words, canvas postscript is NOT WYSIWYG,
certainly NOT for text.

YT>
YT> Is this a W*ndoze specific font thing? - how do I make my output look
YT> a little better ? (i.e. Arial's nice, but a bit boring :) )
YT>
YT>
YT> Thanks,
YT>
YT>
YT>
YT> Youra.
YT>                                                                

--
                                     \/


http://www.deepsoft.com              /\FidoNet:    1:321/153



Mon, 05 May 2003 11:03:14 GMT  
 Printing and fonts under windows(98)
Under ghostscript, you'll want to look at how to add fonts.
You bascially put the fonts into the font directory used
by ghostscript and adjust the Fontmap.  One common problem
is the way that Tk outputs the font names.  The capitalization
is off for multi-worded font names.  So you'll want to make
sure there are Fontmap names which correspond to Tk's
first letter only capitalization convention.  You can use
fontmapping options... but I've never found them to
work correctly in Tk nor in ghostscript.  Hopefully what
I've said here applies in the Windows version of ghostscript...
it certainly holds true with Ghostscript under *ix.

Here's more information than you want to know... but
everyone knows that this is one of my favorite rants...
so here goes...

As for WYSIWYG fonts... the way that Tk does conversion from
screen to postscript fonts WILL NEVER produce WYSIWYG.
Trying to make any kind of formula for conversion of screen
dpi to Postscript resolution will not work... for several
reasons... one is that Tk does not store enough resolution
on font point sizes (does not allow fractional point sizes).
Regardless, even if Tk were patched to allow for WYSIWYG,
it will never make it into the core because it will alter
existing behavior... which seems to bother people more
than "correctness".

Under the old... declared to be "icky"... XFLD way of
describing fonts, there at least was the ability to
select a font using something pretty close to Postscript
coordinate space by selecting X/Y resolutions at 72.
However, this ability is a Unix X11 thing... and since Tk
became Window friendly, XFLD's were pseudo-scrapped (yes,
it's still there.... but the brokeness in conversion
comes from the support for the new font paradigm).  Now,
I must say that WYSIWYG may be possible... if not already
supported under Windows to an extent... but the two
solutions are at odds with each other, and the current
implementation does not sufficiently address the platform
specifics.... in fact the font point size adjustment
code is located in the 'generic' section... not in
the platform specific code areas.  Anyway... to
fix this under Unix... the offending manipulation of
the point size in tkFont.c can be removed and then if
your canvas specifies the fonts using 72 dpi resolutions,
you'll get very near WYSIWYG output from the canvas.
It may well work for Windows too.... I just don't have
any motivation to try it there (there's a kazillion
packages to do graphics, etc. on Windows without
using the non-Windows-friendly-and-therefore-evil
Postscript).

Some of this info is documented in the ImPress
documentation... though the mapping of screen to
printer fonts can be complex.... indeed very
complex under *ix.  I probably need to document
it more thoroughly.... if I figure a way of
automating any of this to any sort of "reasonable"
end... I will endeavor to add it to ImPress.

http://www.ntlug.org/~ccox/impress/impress/doc/impdoc.html#imp8_4

Have fun,
Chris

Quote:

> Hi Folks,

> A question for you printing/PostScript gurus out there - how do I make
> sure that the fonts I can place on a canvas can actually be printed?

> I am currently creating a canvas, using the postcript file output
> option to create an EPS file, and sending the result to a PostScript
> printer with the most excellent PrintFile package that has been
> mentioned on a number of occasions in this group.

> However, the only matches in font terms that I can get seem to be
> "Arial" and "Times", in whatever size
> If I try to use another font - say "Comic Sans MS" - the canvas gets
> it right, but it always ends up as "Courier" when the printer prints
> it out...

> Is this a W*ndoze specific font thing? - how do I make my output look
> a little better ? (i.e. Arial's nice, but a bit boring :) )

> Thanks,

> Youra.



Mon, 05 May 2003 12:50:42 GMT  
 Printing and fonts under windows(98)

Quote:

> As for WYSIWYG fonts... the way that Tk does conversion from
> screen to postscript fonts WILL NEVER produce WYSIWYG.
> Trying to make any kind of formula for conversion of screen
> dpi to Postscript resolution will not work... for several
> reasons... one is that Tk does not store enough resolution
> on font point sizes (does not allow fractional point sizes).
> Regardless, even if Tk were patched to allow for WYSIWYG,
> it will never make it into the core because it will alter
> existing behavior... which seems to bother people more
> than "correctness".

More to the point, the fact is that PostScript is not Windows
friendly, and the whole concept of printing has to be revisited
in a cross-platform way.  Yes, the font metrics on generated
Postscript are wrong.  Nobody likes them.  Many people, even
on Unix, resort to kludges like

    exec xwd -id [winfo id .] | xwdtopnm | ppmtops | lpr

to get WYSIWYG.  (In the process, they also degrade their
printout to WYSIAYG - What You See Is All You Get.)

The effort spend improving the PostScript conversion, though,
would be better spent getting something like TkGS into place,
so that Tk can paint in native device contexts.  Most of the
people that are looking at the issue seriously enough to be
writing code for it appear to be favoring the TkGS approach.

By the way, if you want to hack up better font mapping, please
do so; a TkGS driver for PostScript output (needed for Unix)
will certainly benefit!

--
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin KENNY      GE Corporate R&D, Niskayuna, New York, USA



Mon, 05 May 2003 03:00:00 GMT  
 Printing and fonts under windows(98)

Hi Guys,

Thanks for all the replies - I tinhk the -fontmap thing is going to
work for me - must have missed that in my original trawl through the
man page...

On the WYSIWYG front - not an issue for me - in fact, I don't really
care what it looks like on the screen, as long as I have reprodicible
control over what it looks like on the printed page, particularly in
terms on fonts - I'd already noticed that what gets printed out does
not match what I see - font sizes in the main didn't match, but I have
been controlling positions on the canvas in centimetres rather than
pixels, so have been able to control everything but the fonts nicely.
I've writen an order processing and invoice generation app. for an
e-commerce site that takes customer orders in the form of
varname,varcontents\n repeated a number of times, and spits out a
'pretty' packing list and invoice to send to the customer - that's the
only reason I'm worried about the font on the printed page - it's
meant to fit the corporate image and look/feel of the web site.

Thanks again for all the pointers - hadn't expected to stir up QUITE
so much discussion!

Youra.



Quote:

>> As for WYSIWYG fonts... the way that Tk does conversion from
>> screen to postscript fonts WILL NEVER produce WYSIWYG.
>> Trying to make any kind of formula for conversion of screen
>> dpi to Postscript resolution will not work... for several
>> reasons... one is that Tk does not store enough resolution
>> on font point sizes (does not allow fractional point sizes).
>> Regardless, even if Tk were patched to allow for WYSIWYG,
>> it will never make it into the core because it will alter
>> existing behavior... which seems to bother people more
>> than "correctness".

>More to the point, the fact is that PostScript is not Windows
>friendly, and the whole concept of printing has to be revisited
>in a cross-platform way.  Yes, the font metrics on generated
>Postscript are wrong.  Nobody likes them.  Many people, even
>on Unix, resort to kludges like

>    exec xwd -id [winfo id .] | xwdtopnm | ppmtops | lpr

>to get WYSIWYG.  (In the process, they also degrade their
>printout to WYSIAYG - What You See Is All You Get.)

>The effort spend improving the PostScript conversion, though,
>would be better spent getting something like TkGS into place,
>so that Tk can paint in native device contexts.  Most of the
>people that are looking at the issue seriously enough to be
>writing code for it appear to be favoring the TkGS approach.

>By the way, if you want to hack up better font mapping, please
>do so; a TkGS driver for PostScript output (needed for Unix)
>will certainly benefit!

>--
>73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin KENNY  GE Corporate R&D, Niskayuna, New York, USA



Tue, 06 May 2003 03:00:00 GMT  
 Printing and fonts under windows(98)


:More to the point, the fact is that PostScript is not Windows
:friendly,

I seem to recall that Postscript came out before Windows - making the
statement technically "Windows is not PostScript (or for that matter
many other standard technologies) friendly...

--
"See, he's not just anyone ... he's my son."  Mark Schultz

Even if explicitly stated to the contrary, nothing in this posting
should be construed as representing my employer's opinions.



Wed, 07 May 2003 03:00:00 GMT  
 Printing and fonts under windows(98)
Quote:


>:More to the point, the fact is that PostScript is not Windows
>:friendly,

>I seem to recall that Postscript came out before Windows - making the
>statement technically "Windows is not PostScript (or for that matter
>many other standard technologies) friendly...

                        .
                        .
                        .
It was an interesting race.  Adobe first released
PostScript in 1984, as near as I can tell.  They'd
been working on it for several years.  Microsoft
announced Windows in 1983, but didn't really deliver
1.0 copies until November of 1985 (!).  Windows 1.0
was miserable.  While PostScript was a considerable
success from the start, things truely began to bub-
ble in 1985-'86 when Aldus released PageMaker and
Steve Jobs got Abode to write drivers for the Apple
LaserWriter.

Yes, Windows deliberately eschewed PostScript as a
standard.
--


Business:  http://www.Phaseit.net
Personal:  http://starbase.neosoft.com/~claird/home.html



Fri, 09 May 2003 14:33:41 GMT  
 Printing and fonts under windows(98)

Quote:


> :More to the point, the fact is that PostScript is not Windows
> :friendly,

> I seem to recall that Postscript came out before Windows - making the
> statement technically "Windows is not PostScript (or for that matter
> many other standard technologies) friendly...

I stand corrected.  Alas, Windows is so entrenched that it gets to
rewrite history.  8-)

--
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin KENNY      GE Corporate R&D, Niskayuna, New York, USA



Fri, 09 May 2003 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 8 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Ugly font in VW7.0 on Windows 98

2. Windows 98 printing problem

3. Printing in Windows 98

4. Windows 98 printing problem

5. Printing through Windows 98 with S87

6. problems printing in windows 98

7. Printing Problems in Windows 98

8. How to print in Windows 98/2000

9. Tcl/Tk printing on Windows 95/98

10. Moving from Windows 98 to Windows 2000

11. Clarion 5 app, windows 98 and windows XP

12. Windows 98 DDK & Windows in assembly

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software