Re: [R] r under linux: creating high quality bmp's for win users

From: Jan T. Kim <jtk_at_cmp.uea.ac.uk>
Date: Tue 22 Mar 2005 - 23:18:13 EST

On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 11:59:25AM +0100, Christoph Lehmann wrote:

> I produce graphics with R under linux, but my collaborators often use
> windows and cannot import eps pics e.g. in msword
>
> what is the standard way to get e.g. bmp's with the same quality as eps.
> going the way: creating eps, convert eps2bmp using 'convert' doesn't
> yield good enough bmp's
>
> thanks for a short hint

The too short version: You can't get bmps of the same quality as encapsulated postscript because bmp is a raster format and postscript is a language that implements vector graphics.

The somewhat more useful (hopefully) version: You can always use gs to produce a fixed resolution raster snapshot of your EPS file, e.g.

    gs -r600x600 -sDEVICE=bmp16m -sOutputFile=x.bmp -dNOPAUSE x.eps -c quit

This allows you to control the resolution (-r option) and should allow you to produce any "quality" that may practically suffice, although this is a kludge.

Best regards, Jan

P.S.: I believe that the convert program just acts as a wrapper to gs anyway, with a resolution that is chosen to be useful for screen graphics rather than for printing.

P.P.S.: I'll never understand why Word & Co. don't support encapsulated postscript. With all that OLE and whatever, it can't be impossible to do as LaTeX / xdvi does...?

-- 
 +- Jan T. Kim -------------------------------------------------------+
 |    *NEW*    email: jtk@cmp.uea.ac.uk                               |
 |    *NEW*    WWW:   http://www.cmp.uea.ac.uk/people/jtk             |
 *-----=<  hierarchical systems are for files, not for humans  >=-----*

______________________________________________
R-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
Received on Tue Mar 22 22:44:38 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri 03 Mar 2006 - 03:30:52 EST