Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site timeinc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135! timeinc!dwight From: dwi...@timeinc.UUCP (Dwight Ernest) Newsgroups: net.text Subject: Postscript(tm) Raster Imaging HOL from Adobe Message-ID: <153@timeinc.UUCP> Date: Wed, 1-May-85 22:24:04 EDT Article-I.D.: timeinc.153 Posted: Wed May 1 22:24:04 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 3-May-85 02:43:30 EDT Reply-To: dwi...@timeb.UUCP (Dwight Ernest) Organization: Time, Inc. - New York Lines: 26 I'm quite interested in any comments anyone might have concerning Adobe Systems, Inc., or their new proposed raster imaging high-order programming language (stream language for output device interpretation) called Postscript(tm). It would appear to be not only a great idea, but perhaps an idea whose time has come; standards in raster imaging are certainly sorely needed. Briefly, Postscript drivers would be written (and in some cases have been written, for instance, by Apple for the Mac) to convert internal raster formats into Postscript source code for outputting to raster imaging devices in which are located interpreters (a good example of an actual implementation is the new Apple LaserWriter for the Mac) with their own MPUs and integral Postscript interpreter along with, ummm, 1.5 megs of ROM and .5 megs of RAM (or have I got it reversed?). Is anyone else using this/interested in this/know anything more about this/interested in conversing about this? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- --Dwight Ernest KA2CNN \ Usenet:...vax135!timeinc!dwight Time Inc. Edit./Prod. Tech. Grp., New York City Voice: (212) 554-5061 \ Compuserve: 70210,523 Telemail: DERNEST/TIMECOMDIV/TIMEINC \ MCI: DERNEST "The opinions expressed above are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Time Incorporated." -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site cubsvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!rna!cubsvax!peters From: pet...@cubsvax.UUCP (Peter S. Shenkin) Newsgroups: fa.laser-lovers Subject: Impress vs. Postscript Message-ID: <336@cubsvax.UUCP> Date: Wed, 29-May-85 11:02:15 EDT Article-I.D.: cubsvax.336 Posted: Wed May 29 11:02:15 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 31-May-85 04:26:50 EDT Reply-To: pet...@cubsvax.UUCP (Peter S. Shenkin) Organization: Columbia Univ Biology, New York City Lines: 38 I recently wrote a freshman chemistry study guide to accompany a new text (Segal's "Chemistry, Experiment and Theory"), and had to supply camera-ready copy to the publisher (Wiley). The text was being processed with troff, making extensive use of tbl and especially eqn, but the best output device we had was the Versatec, which wasn't good enough. So I started looking around for laser printers to typeset the final output. I looked at an Imagen 8/300, a LaserWriter and an Imagen 10 (older model, 240/in resolution; I may have the name a bit off; it may be Impress 10 or Imprint 10 or something). I ended up using the last of these because it was free, but got to look at extensive samples (Like 20-40 page chapters with equations) on the LaserWriter and the 8/300 in the course of deciding. After reading Les Earnest's and Brian Reid's interchanges, I decided to pull out what I could find of past samples and take a look. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the 8/300 sample, but my recollection is that, except for resolution, it looked pretty much like the Imagen 10 sample. I wish I had all three to look at together, so take what you are about to hear with your own grain of salt. My impression is that LaserWriter wins. The fonts on the Imagen are just too ugly. I see no problem with spacing on the LaserWriter. I realize there are many caveats, mostly involving defaults. The Imagen files were printed with default fonts, and the LaserWriter output was printed using Transcript to Postscript, which may adjust spacing better than the samples Les is looking at. But I wish I had had a LaserWriter available at the time I was running off my book. I will say that Transcript/Postscript drew crummy square-root signs (too far above the argument, and not extending low enough to the left); on the other hand, troff -t, when filtered into an Impress file using whatever program Imagen supplied, drew square root signs through the middle of the argument, so that when running off the final document square roots had to be removed from the input file, then drawn in by hand. (It's now years later than this software was supplied, so it's possible this bug has been fixed.) Incidentally, I'm sending this to fa.laser-lovers via Pnews from a Usenet site. Does anyone know if an article posted in that manner gets back to ARPA? I.e., will Les and Brian get it? Peter S. Shenkin philabs!cubsvax!peters