At 06:19 PM 5/16/06 -0400, you wrote: >1) Compile postscript in Finale, or export EPS, with AdobePS 4.5.3 >printer driver >2) Running that file through Distiller (v5) and/or GS (v8.53) >3) Output has misplaced 16th note flag
Yes. (Just this one character, it seems. I haven't used every one in the font, but I've used a lot of them.) >1) Print from Finale normally, to either a postscript or non-postscript >printer *or* print directly to the distiller driver ...to save as .ps or .pdf >2) Output has correctly placed 16th note flag Yes. Everything is correct. Just the ugly screen display and a typical huge Finale Windows PDF file size. >As an aside, are you running Windows 98? I believe XP should have the >PScript5 driver. I am using this on both Windows 98SE and Windows XP. I tried the XP after Scott's suggestion to try it on several computers. Both results are identical. >1) Install a different Postscript printer driver - try the HP LaserJet >5000 one, or possibly the HP LaserJet 4MP >2) try compiling and/or exporting and see if the result is the same I used an IBM InfoPrint 5000 and an Apple 630, which are two of several PS drivers I have installed for client jobs. No change. The Postscript driver doesn't seem to affect the EPS export or PS compile anyway; even with no PS driver selected in the printer dialog, the EPS export and PS compile function. Finale seems to have its own Postscript compiler for these. >executing function >'flup' on them. I'm not sure what that function is These seem to be abbreviated descriptions of the glyph's function. I think this is "flag up". >Is your glyph width for the >16th note flag the same for both fonts? And the glyph origin point is >the same as well? The width is very slightly different, but the metrics are set in the font. The origin point is the same. >1) Edit the RevereFinale postscript listing and change the 4604.2788 to >4602.9976. The file is plain-text, so you can just use Notepad or >Wordpad to do this. >2) Run this edited file through Distiller and/or Ghostscript and see how >it affects the x-positioning. By adding 58 to the horizontal value, the flags place correctly. (I can also adjust the y position.) So just to see if I could goose this thing, I went back to the original font, adjusted a few positions slightly (which I was going to do anyway), including the vertical position of this flag. I then reinstalled the font, and used the new font in all the same combinations. All the results were the same. Only this glyph malfunctions. I'm going to bed. I'll look at the problem again in the morning. Thanks much, Dennis -- Please participate in my latest project: http://maltedmedia.com/waam/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
