OK, I've got it. Previously, I checked the quality of the output image by two means: by visual inspection in gv and by checking the size of the output eps images. I was puzzled by the different sizes of the images at magnification 1. Also, convert produces much larger eps files.
When the size of the output image is set to 6.3246cm (1494px at 600dpi) and the axes are turned off, both versions appear identical when printed. Thanks for your help, petr On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 20:35, Jouni K. Seppänen wrote: > I don't see a big difference between test-600.eps and test-convert.eps > when viewed in gv with magnification 10 and 0.1, respectively. Obviously > there is some resampling in test-600.eps: your source image is 1494 by > 1494 pixels large, which at 600 dpi is larger than the 5 by 5 cm figure > created by the script (and the axes are even smaller). test-convert.eps > has a bounding box of 0 0 1494 1494, so obviously it is a non-resampled > image at 72 dpi. > > If the problem you are alluding to is in the resampling, perhaps > varying the interpolation algorithm will produce a better result? > See the docstring of imshow. > > To get a non-resampled image, figimage should work, but it doesn't seem > to understand PIL images yet... ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Matplotlib-users mailing list Matplotlib-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-users
