EPS printing questions

[RTK]

I have my ideas but I would be grateful if someone could nail this down for me:

Is there a difference in the printout quality of an EPS file that consists of Type 1 fonts and some simple vector shapes; and the same file with the fonts turned in to shapes/curves instead (printed on a postscript printer?)

What kind of differences, quality issues could you 'expect' to see?

Also, if I have an EPS file (e.g. 3.5inx2in business card) with only vectors and Type 1 fonts - what resolution is it "normally" printed in?

Can you scale the printout when doing the actual printing of an EPS file (no bitmaps) or do you have to export an EPS file for each size instance?

Thanks!

Risto

risto@ristoklint.com

Visit my web site!

[RTK]

I have my ideas but I would be grateful if someone could nail this down for me:

Is there a difference in the printout quality of an EPS file that consists of Type 1 fonts and some simple vector shapes; and the same file with the fonts turned in to shapes/curves instead (printed on a postscript printer?)

What kind of differences, quality issues could you 'expect' to see?

Also, if I have an EPS file (e.g. 3.5inx2in business card) with only vectors and Type 1 fonts - what resolution is it "normally" printed in?

Can you scale the printout when doing the actual printing of an EPS file (no bitmaps) or do you have to export an EPS file for each size instance?

Thanks!

Risto

risto@ristoklint.com

Visit my web site!

[gwpriester]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Is there a difference in the printout quality of an EPS file that consists of Type 1 fonts and some simple vector shapes; and the same file with the fonts turned in to shapes/curves instead (printed on a postscript printer?) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would not think there would be any problem or noticable difference. It basically comes down to how faithfully Xara (or any other application that exports to EPS) can remap the characters. Most problems occur when service bureaus try to work (on Macs) with TrueType font files. Often there are tracking and spacing problems between platforms. But fonts converted to curves should print just as they appear on the screen.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Also, if I have an EPS file (e.g. 3.5inx2in business card) with only vectors and Type 1 fonts - what resolution is it "normally" printed in? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Text can be printed at very high resolutions into the thousands of dpi. But I have printed text at 300 dpi with good results.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Can you scale the printout when doing the actual printing of an EPS file (no bitmaps) or do you have to export an EPS file for each size instance? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I believe the answer is yes, as long as you do not have bitmaps included in your EPS file, it can be placed in an application such as Quack, er, QuarkXPress, scaled, then output.

Most service bureaus print EPS files from an application such as Quark.

That said, I'm currently writing a review of QuarkXPress 5 as we speak. I'll give it a try and if I am incorrect, I'll post an update.

Gary

Gary Priester

Moderator Person

<a href="http://www.gwpriester.com">
www.gwpriester.com </a>


XaraXone

[RTK]

... Gary!

I thought I finally got most of it and then I saw this -

Quote: Most problems occur when service bureaus try to work (on Macs) with TrueType font files. Often there are tracking and spacing problems between platforms.

*sigh* there is always something...

... I think I'm changing mediums to Papier Marche... less issues that way! [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Risto

risto@ristoklint.com

Visit my web site!

[gwpriester]

Having reviewed both InDesign 2.0 and Quark 5, I have to wonder why anyone still uses Quark. I guess because it is what they learned on and they do not want to learn anything new.

I exported some text and a vector object to EPS in two versions: with the fonts not converted, and with the Export Text as Curves option.

In Quark both images placed with very low resolution preview images and printed exactly the same on my non-PostScript printer. Obviously Quark is set up to output to a PostScript printing device. So there would be no way to tell what the output was going to look like until it was output on an Imagesetter or PostScript equipped printer.

InDesign, on the other hand, placed both images with a better resolution preview image. However you can also specify a highest view quality, which I did and the image was sharp and clear.

What it showed (and Quark did not) was that the EPS file in which the text was not exported as curves, had lost all formatting including the Multiple Master Adobe font I used and had reduced all the text to Times Roman.

When I printed the two EPS images on my HP InkJet non-PostScript the text converted to curves printed clean and as formatted in Xara. The text that was not converted lost all spacing and formatting information.

The good image scaled in InDesign flawlessly and printed the same.

Lesson learned. Export Text as Curves.

Gary

Gary Priester

Moderator Person

<a href="http://www.gwpriester.com">
www.gwpriester.com </a>


XaraXone

[Sean Sedwards]

I guess the advantage of exporting as a font rather than shapes is to save space when you have large blocks of text. In all other circumstances it seems like a recipe for disaster with no benefits.

The dpi value on the eps export only relates to bitmaps and effects that use bitmaps (e.g. transparency, bevels etc.). In theory, all vector objects are governed by the maximum dpi of the printer. Be aware, however, that some vector effects, such as gradient fills, are created using thin strip shapes filled with solid colour. The more you enlarge them, the less smooth the transitions look.

Regards - Sean

[RTK]

... Sean for jumping in with the gradient fills... I will have to look at that.

One last question: when printing text converted curves or Type 1 fonts (to a postscript printer), are both treated the same way by the anti-aliasing of the app that is outputting it to the printer?

Thanks a million!

Risto

risto@ristoklint.com

Visit my web site!

[Klaus Nordby]

Gary, I got my copy of InDesign 2.0 three days ago, and can only agree with you that this is a GREAT program! I've been using Quark since 1990, first on Mac and then on PC, but I'm now totally trashing all Quark production work in favor of InDesign.

I encourage all who have need of profesional DTP stuff to try out InDesign. It's time to dethrone Quark!

K
www.xaraxone.com/FeaturedArt/kn/
www.klausnordby.com/xara

[Sean Sedwards]

In theory there should be no difference using fonts or shapes as far as anti-aliasing (or Resolution Enhancement Technology) is concerned. OTOH, I'd avoid using fonts unless you're outputting pages of text. Definitely don't use them for just a few banners.

Regards - Sean

[philhendry]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gary W. Priester:
Having reviewed both InDesign 2.0 and Quark 5, I have to wonder why anyone still uses Quark. I guess because it is what they learned on and they do not want to learn anything new.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

On a similar note, I had to use Illustrator 10 for some stuff a few days ago- we have a site license for it here at work. "Ugh" is about the most charitable thing I could find to say. Talk about running slowly- even on a fairly fast Athlon. And unintuitive (meaning slow to use too), and all those darned menus all over the place, and... and...

I guess that, as Gary said about Quark, the reason it's the industry standard isn't because it's any good, it's because most of the graphics professionals learned Illustrator and don't want to change.

Anyway, I'm back to Xara again, and am a happy camper once more. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

Cheers,
Phil

Trust the computer industry to shorten 'Year 2000' to 'Y2K'. It was this sort of thinking that caused the problem in the first place.