Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 10:21 PM 1/24/05 +0100, d. collins wrote:
>Looks very nice, as far as I can judge (being an early music buff). Is 
>there an audio file on your site?

There's one here:
http://maltedmedia.com/people/bathory/music/mp3/newcentury/by_still_waters-20041023.m3u
http://maltedmedia.com/people/bathory/music/mp3/newcentury/by_still_waters-20041023.mp3

(The first half is great, but because of the hall acoustics, she loses 
the recorded drone midway. We'll record this at some point with a 
live drone.)

Dennis


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 08:22 AM 1/24/05 +0100, d. collins wrote:
>Are you saying that your print-outs are better without the OwnPS=0 setting? 

Different. Everything appears better except the verticals such as stems and
barlines. I have custom thicknesses set for these because I always thought
the Finale defaults were too thin. But they come out quite a bit thicker
with the OwnPS=0 setting.

Let me double-check that the direct-to-PDF driver is set for portability.
And if it is already, then I'll twiddle some other things to see if I can
fix that verticals problem. If I can, then everything's gooder. :)

By the way, those quarter-tone symbols in the samples are my replacements
for those in Finale, which I don't like (and which require double symbols
for 3/4 sharp and 3/4 flat). I have four symbols (up-arrowed sharp and flat
and down-arrowed sharp and flat). Did the Cyrillic come out for everybody?

And, hey, did you like the score in my samples, by the way? This was
premiered in New York last October.

(The other) Dennis


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 01:15 PM 1/23/05 -0800, Richard Yates wrote:
>> http://maltedmedia.com/images/finale/kvt-ownps0-print-to-pdf-2400dpi.pdf
>>
>> The last one shows perfectly onscreen at all resolutions with Reader 5.
>> (Only meant to print page 1, but printed all 7 pages with the 600dpi.)
>
>Well, it's true that they don't display with unequal widths, but the staff
>lines stay very thin (1 pixel) at all magnifications below 3500%. Check the
>screen shot at:
>
>http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/kvt-ownps0-print-to-pdf-2400dpi.gif

Okay, that's for sure. I also compared printouts of the three I posted,
Finale direct to printer, and the original settings (without the OwnPS
setting, found at
http://maltedmedia.com/people/bathory/music/pdf/bystillwaters.pdf). There
are anomalies in the vertical elements of the 'good' screen display
versions, especially the stems, which are thicker than they should be.

Sigh.

(The other) Dennis


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Richard Yates]

> http://maltedmedia.com/images/finale/kvt-ownps0-print-to-pdf-2400dpi.pdf
>
> The last one shows perfectly onscreen at all resolutions with Reader 5.
> (Only meant to print page 1, but printed all 7 pages with the 600dpi.)

Well, it's true that they don't display with unequal widths, but the staff
lines stay very thin (1 pixel) at all magnifications below 3500%. Check the
screen shot at:

http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/kvt-ownps0-print-to-pdf-2400dpi.gif
Richard Yates












___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

Re previous message, here are three PDF files.

http://maltedmedia.com/images/finale/kvt-ownps0-print-to-ps-then-distill.pdf
http://maltedmedia.com/images/finale/kvt-ownps0-print-to-pdf-600dpi.pdf
http://maltedmedia.com/images/finale/kvt-ownps0-print-to-pdf-2400dpi.pdf

The last one shows perfectly onscreen at all resolutions with Reader 5.
(Only meant to print page 1, but printed all 7 pages with the 600dpi.)

Dennis




___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 08:27 PM 1/23/05 +0100, d. collins wrote:
>As if I had nothing better to do, I continued to fool around with Finale 
>and PDFs. Amusingly, I checked my old mailboxes and found exactly the same 
>questions making the rounds three years ago, with the same suspects (in 
>particular Jari, the other Dennis, and myself). At the time, there was much 
>talk about the OwnPS=0 setting one could add the finale.ini file. Well, I 
>just gave it a try, and it gives excellent PDFs over here, very 
>good-looking  and Mac-like on screen (but only in recent versions of the 
>Reader), and - more importantly, at least for me - print-out much closer to 
>the direct print-out from Finale.

I had forgotten about OwnPS=0. It still doesn't work in WinFin2K3 for
compiled PS, but it sure does a better job on-screen for files printed to
PS and distilled. I have Reader 5, and it's very good: the lines are still
not equal, but much cleaner-looking -- and none of the ugly scrubbly look
to the display.

In printing to PDF, however, the results were much better. With Distiller's
PDF print driver resolution set to 2400dpi, the on-screen and print
versions were terrific ... and hardly any bigger than resolution set to
600dpi, where the on-screen had a little irregularity in staff lines.

>3) The printing to PDF takes over 30 (!) times longer than without this 
>setting (over 30 seconds per page, as opposed to less than 1 second), on a 
>2.4 GHz Pentium machine with plenty of RAM.

Printing to PS was normal (because the wait is for Distiller to load the
fonts), but printing to PDF the first time (which loads all the font sets
on my machine, which is bunches) took 4:30 until the printing progress
screen appeared (running 1.4GHz Athlon). Subsequent printing without
re-running Finale decreased the time-to-print-progress to about 15 seconds,
with subsequent pages printed with no delays.

Dennis




___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

Daniel Wolf wrote:
What PS Language Level have you set? Have you also set it to Portability?
It's set for Level 2 and optimized for portability.
Try with another PS language level - for example test level 1. I've 
noticed in other apps that when the PDF export/distiller process gives 
error about "OffendingCommand", changing the language level seem to 
solve it.

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 09:12 PM 1/21/05 -0800, Stephen Onwood wrote:
>  At 09:55 PM 1/20/2005, you wrote:
>
>> I spent sometime to do more testing, and my original report was
>>  Since I am not used to doing this on Windows side, I didn't
>>  I
>>  The result was much better than I initially had:
>> 
>
> I took the time to compare these two files closely at various
>magnifications from 100% to1600%.
> The mac file looks great at all magnifications while the win file is
>awful. What is interesting is that the line including stems and leger lines
>At higher magnifications this waviness remains and it doesn't taper to
>a fine point as it does inthe mac file (1600%).

Using Reader 5 on Win98, both files look almost identical (except for the
title fonts) -- and neither is any better than what I've been creating &
seeing in other files. Reader smoothing off. The only graphical difference
I can see is that the stems and barlines on the Windows version are offset
to the left by about 1/2 stem. The tie curves are identical to the pixel on
my screen. In this recent discussion, I have not seen the crosshatching or
multiple lines on Reader 5, which I used to see in Reader 4.

(The other) Dennis




___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Stephen Onwood]

At 09:55 PM 1/20/2005, you wrote:
d. collins / 05.1.20 / 00:27 AM
wrote:
>Would you be willing to post somewhere or send me a sample PDF in
both 
>versions, Mac and Windows? It would be interesting to compare
them.
I spent sometime to do more testing, and my original report was
incorrect.  Since I am not used to doing this on Windows side, I
didn't
catch that Acrobat PDF Writer defaults to 96 dpi, and it won't
stick.  I
then selected 600 dpi.  The result was much better than I initially
had:

I took the time to compare these two files closely at various
magnifications from 100% to1600%.
The mac file looks great at all magnifications while the win file is
awful. What is interesting is that the line including stems and leger
lines are comprised of several smaller lines (800%).  What is
more interesting is that the slurs are jagged between 100% and
600%.  At 800% the jaggies smooth out but the slur contour is
wavy.  At higher magnifications this waviness remains and it doesn't
taper to a fine point as it does inthe mac file (1600%).
I don't know what this proves but fonts and curves are also not rendered
correctly.  What do you experts make of it?
Regards,
Steve




No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.1 - Release Date: 1/19/2005
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Daniel Wolf]

Jari Williamsson wrote:
Daniel Wolf wrote:
The greater problem for me is that I can't get a postscript file out 
of Finale, and this has been the case since Finale 2003.

What PS Language Level have you set? Have you also set it to Portability?
It's set for Level 2 and optimized for portability.
Thanks,
Daniel Wolf
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Aaron Sherber]

At 12:49 PM 01/21/2005, Stephen Onwood wrote:
>Zoomed in at 1600% on the dashtest.pdf in Acrobat reader 6 and the staff
>lines and the bar line
>(including dotted bar lines) are composed of 4 various thickness lines.
>Date and rests are solid.
I haven't been following this whole thread. I agree that at 1600% the lines 
in the PDF look as though they are composed of thinner lines, but if you 
zoom in further they go back to being one solid line. The multi-line thing 
must just be some artifact of display at that particular zoom.

Aaron.
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

Daniel Wolf wrote:
The greater problem for me is that I can't get a postscript file out of 
Finale, and this has been the case since Finale 2003.
What PS Language Level have you set? Have you also set it to Portability?
Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Daniel Wolf]

Celia Onwood wrote:
Zoomed in at 1600% on the dashtest.pdf in Acrobat reader 6 and the 
staff lines and the bar line
(including dotted bar lines) are composed of 4 various thickness 
lines. Date and rests are solid.

Finale 2005a, WinXP.   I can print satisfactory PDFs by printing 
directly to Adobe PDF.  In Acrobat 6, I get the same 4 lines decribed 
above _only_ 1600% resolution and these are not visible in a printout.  
Above and below this level of resolution, the lines are solid.  I cannot 
dupicate this behavior at all in Ghostview 4.6, but Ghostview zoom 
facility is clumsy (slow, no % indication).

The greater problem for me is that I can't get a postscript file out of 
Finale, and this has been the case since Finale 2003. Finale has always 
had a problem with PS page numbering, but that has been something I 
could fix by hand directly in PS.  But now every attempt with Distiller 
yields this message:

%%[ Error: undefined; OffendingCommand: Pscript_WinNT_Compat ]%%
%%[ Flushing: rest of job (to end-of-file) will be ignored ]%%
%%[ Warning: PostScript error. No PDF file produced. ] %%
With Ghostview, the error message is more explicit. If anyone is 
interested, I can post that message.

Daniel Wolf
Budapest
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Phil Daley]

At 12:56 PM 1/21/2005, Celia Onwood wrote:
  
PS  Monitor resolution
1024x768 if that has an effect on what we see.
Wow, I can't believe people are still using low resolutions like
that.
I would never use a computer at less than 1600 x 1200
I usually run at 2000 x 17something, I can't remember the exact
number


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

Stephen Onwood wrote:
Zoomed in at 1600% on the dashtest.pdf in Acrobat reader 6 and the staff 
lines and the bar line
(including dotted bar lines) are composed of 4 various thickness lines. 
Date and rests are solid.
Ok, I can't see that on Acrobat 5, but I believe you. Back to square 2...
Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Celia Onwood]

Zoomed in at 1600% on the dashtest.pdf in Acrobat reader 6 and the staff
lines and the bar line
(including dotted bar lines) are composed of 4 various thickness lines.
Date and rests are solid.

PS  Monitor resolution 1024x768 if that has an effect on what we
see.




No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.1 - Release Date: 1/19/2005
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Stephen Onwood]

At 07:47 AM 1/21/2005, you wrote:
Instead, take a look at these examples, where:
- Font subsitution works correctly
- Dashed lines are identical between Finale and the PS version
- No artifacts in the smartshape
- Staff lines can be zoomed in to 1600% and still look correct
http://www.jwmusic.nu/dashtest-finalescreenshot.gif
http://www.jwmusic.nu/dashtest.pdf
Zoomed in at 1600% on the dashtest.pdf in Acrobat reader 6 and the staff 
lines and the bar line
(including dotted bar lines) are composed of 4 various thickness lines. 
Date and rests are solid.

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.1 - Release Date: 1/19/2005
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

d. collins wrote:
Besides the fonts, there remain other problems in the postscript 
listing. Look at the following sample from a PS listing compared to the 
original:
- dashed bar line with 7 dashes instead of 5
- smart "shape" vertical date

www.philomela.net/files/pl.gif
www.philomela.net/finale/pl.gif
Instead, take a look at these examples, where:
- Font subsitution works correctly
- Dashed lines are identical between Finale and the PS version
- No artifacts in the smartshape
- Staff lines can be zoomed in to 1600% and still look correct
http://www.jwmusic.nu/dashtest-finalescreenshot.gif
http://www.jwmusic.nu/dashtest.pdf
Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

d. collins wrote:
Three ways we could produce quality PDFs. And not one of them works. 
Actually, I just created fully functional PS files without any font 
embedding problems (using WinXP) and ran them through Distiller.

And I now have even been able to export selections to EPS files (!), but 
there I still have to solve the font embedding issue for the music 
fonts. The jaggy TIFF preview looks correct though.

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

I wrote:
So if we just could get PostScript export
to work properly...
...which I just did BTW.
http://www.jwmusic.nu/acrobattest.pdf
This version should be built by solid lines.
Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

d. collins wrote:
Well, if Sibelius files are rendered with single lines, which seems to 
be the case, then the blame is on Finale.
That's correct. This is how FinWin has always worked - printing is 
raster-optimized, while PS output is more device-independent.

Zoom in on the lines of a PDF created by the "Compile PostScript" option 
and you'll see the difference. So if we just could get PostScript export 
to work properly...

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[dhbailey]

Simon Troup wrote:
Sorry? WinFin does do EPS files doesn't it?

Nope. It's broken. Has been broken for years. No idea when or if it
will be fixed. I'll post a summary here of my numerous exchanges with
MakeMusic on this subject if anyone is interested.

That's absurd. What are you guys using for output? Don't publishers insist on 
EPS?
Simon Troup
Digital Music Art
The composers I work for and the single publisher which I do the 
majority of my work for want camera-ready printed output.

--
David H. Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Noel Stoutenburg]

Simon wrote, in part:
That's absurd. What are you guys using for output? Don't publishers 
insist on EPS?
to which Dennis relied
I and several others desperately need and want EPS for our publishers. 
But MakeMusic only owned up rather recently to this, and they probably 
won't bother fixing it, because we are only a handful to really need it.
and I would expect that the EPS capability is unlikely to be fixed in 
Windows, because the convergence I perceive between the Windows and MAC 
platforms make it unnecessary.  The most recent EPS Specification (cf. 
) 
dates from the days of DOS 6.22, bearing a cover date of 1-May, 1992; 
hardly the sign of a software technology that is in active development.

ns
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[A-NO-NE Music]

d. collins / 05.1.20 / 00:27 AM wrote:

>Would you be willing to post somewhere or send me a sample PDF in both 
>versions, Mac and Windows? It would be interesting to compare them.

I spent sometime to do more testing, and my original report was
incorrect.  Since I am not used to doing this on Windows side, I didn't
catch that Acrobat PDF Writer defaults to 96 dpi, and it won't stick.  I
then selected 600 dpi.  The result was much better than I initially had:



Now the printouts on HP 5MP Postscript (yes, I use PS driver on Win2K) is
identical between MacOSX, Win2K, and the source Finale file.  I tested
this with original that was created with both WinFin2005 and MacFin2005a,
and saw no difference.

HOWEVER:
The screen display is terrible on the one created from WinFin2005, and is
consistent on both platforms.

My result does coincide with some reports we have seen.  I was wondering
this is because I use PS printer driver on Windows side?  Oh, by the way,
HP 5MP is on my intranet via Netgear Printer Server.

Just for the heck of it, I printed them out to Epson Stylus Color N850 on
my network.  They still printed out fine, not like what I see on the
screen.  On this, however, I won't call them identical.  The one created
with Mac OSX printed much smoother slurs, while straight lines are pretty
identical.

-- 

- Hiro

Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA
 


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Simon Troup]

>> Sorry? WinFin does do EPS files doesn't it?

> Nope. It's broken. Has been broken for years. No idea when or if it
> will be fixed. I'll post a summary here of my numerous exchanges with
> MakeMusic on this subject if anyone is interested.

That's absurd. What are you guys using for output? Don't publishers insist on 
EPS?

Simon Troup
Digital Music Art

-
Finale IRC channel
server: irc.chatspike.net
port: 6667
channel: #Finale
-

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Simon Troup]

> One of the main differences between a Mac and Windows Finale PDF
> seems to be that the Windows Finale PDF staff lines are made up of
> lots of clustered lines all set at 0.06 point stroke, whereas the mac
> PDFs have a single line of varying stroke depending on the width
> needed.
> 
> Simon Troup

I think a straight answer from MM as to why this is the case is in order.

Simon Troup
Digital Music Art

-
Finale IRC channel
server: irc.chatspike.net
port: 6667
channel: #Finale
-

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Richard Yates]

>the Finale lines are made up of multiple lines of a much thinner stroke.
It's this that is making lines appear bigger and smaller.

This shows in http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/10EVPUs1600percent.gif

RY


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Richard Yates]

> Have we isolated anything yet? :)

Probably have just expanded our confusion!

I tried a 100% staff at .5 EVPU staff lines - the pdf looks okay except at
118%.

Here is the pdf of one staff line of 10 EVPUs(!) at 1600% magnification:

http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/10EVPUs1600percent.gif

This gif even changes its appearance a lot under different magnifications in
PhotoShop!

This is getting too confusing for me.

Richard Yates


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Richard Yates]

Hmmm. Mine use 3.5EVPUs and 80% reduction, i.e. a lot thicker. Thinner ones
may be more subject to rounding error and hence show more variability. on
screen.

RY

>Line width: 2,5 EVPUs (from Finale's European template)
>Staff size: 96
>System reduction: 70%
>Everything else: 100%
>Page size: A4

>Or have a look at the file itself:
>www.philomela.net/files/blank.mus

> Dennis



___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Simon Troup]

> > OK, I just posted a 3 page PDF:
> > - page 1 is printed directly to PDF from Finale
> > - page 2 is the same Finale file compiled as a Postscript listing >
> > and then distilled with exactly the same settings
> > - page 3 is a blank page printed to PDF from Sibelius
> > 
> > The difference on screen between the three pages are glaring. 
> > Comparing 
> > the print-outs of 1 and 2 with the same file printed directly from 
> > Finale on my HP Laserjet IIIP, page 1 has thicker lines than the 
> > original, and, worse, irregular staff lines. Page 2 looks very close 
> > to 
> > the Finale output.
> > 
> > http://www.philomela.net/files/finale.pdf
> > 
> > Comments appreciated.
> > 
> > Dennis

Consistent with what I stated earlier, the difference between the Sibelius and 
Finale PDF lines is that the Sibelius lines are single lines, the Finale lines 
are made up of multiple lines of a much thinner stroke. It's this that is 
making lines appear bigger and smaller.

Simon Troup
Digital Music Art

-
Finale IRC channel
server: irc.chatspike.net
port: 6667
channel: #Finale
-

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Johannes Gebauer]

Looks to me as though page 1 is rendered as bitmap, could that be the case?
Johannes
d. collins wrote:
OK, I just posted a 3 page PDF:
- page 1 is printed directly to PDF from Finale
- page 2 is the same Finale file compiled as a Postscript listing and 
then distilled with exactly the same settings
- page 3 is a blank page printed to PDF from Sibelius

The difference on screen between the three pages are glaring. Comparing 
the print-outs of 1 and 2 with the same file printed directly from 
Finale on my HP Laserjet IIIP, page 1 has thicker lines than the 
original, and, worse, irregular staff lines. Page 2 looks very close to 
the Finale output.

http://www.philomela.net/files/finale.pdf
Comments appreciated.
Dennis

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
--
http://www.musikmanufaktur.com
http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Simon Troup]

>> 2) An EPS file
> 
> You must be joking.

Sorry? WinFin does do EPS files doesn't it?


>> 3) A postscript file
> 
> Do you mean a postscript listing compiled by Finale?

Yes, if possible.

Simon Troup
Digital Music Art

-
Finale IRC channel
server: irc.chatspike.net
port: 6667
channel: #Finale
-

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Owain Sutton]

Simon Troup wrote:
Creating a PDF generally involvles "printing" to a PDF driver, either
Adobe's driver, or a third party's driver. There are other ways, of
course, but this is the simplest and the most frequently used.

How many different PDF printer drivers are there?
Off the top of my head, Acrobat (which may be several different ones in 
different versions), CutePDF, PDF995, PDFCreator...
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 08:46 PM 1/20/05 +0100, d. collins wrote:
>WinFin can't embed fonts. One more broken feature.

I print to a Postscript driver for the printer I'm going to use, and then
Distill with embedding enabled. So the fonts can be embedded. Which
PDF-production method doesn't allow embedding?

(The other) Dennis




___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Simon Troup]

> Creating a PDF generally involvles "printing" to a PDF driver, either
> Adobe's driver, or a third party's driver. There are other ways, of
> course, but this is the simplest and the most frequently used.

How many different PDF printer drivers are there?

If you have a moment put a download together consisting of the following, all 
using the same piece of music.

1) PDFs, one for each of the most common drivers.
2) An EPS file
3) A postscript file

Don't bother embedding fonts, it's the lines we're interested in. I'm pretty 
sure this will be quite revealing.

Simon Troup
Digital Music Art

-
Finale IRC channel
server: irc.chatspike.net
port: 6667
channel: #Finale
-

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Simon Troup]

One of the main differences between a Mac and Windows Finale PDF seems to be 
that the Windows Finale PDF staff lines are made up of lots of clustered lines 
all set at 0.06 point stroke, whereas the mac PDFs have a single line of 
varying stroke depending on the width needed.

Surely question is this ... which application is responsible for redndering 
straight lines in that way?

Can someone explain to me the process that a WinFin user has to go through to 
create a PDF? 

Maybe we can narrow this thing down by looking at the various different outputs.

Simon Troup
Digital Music Art

-
Finale IRC channel
server: irc.chatspike.net
port: 6667
channel: #Finale
-

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Randolph Peters]

I've been looking at the various pdf files with uneven staff lines on 
a Mac. (Collins and Yates et al) and I have discovered something that 
may eventually help make a diagnosis.

The files viewed on screen using Acrobat Reader AND Pro version 7 do 
have a prominent unevenness in the staff lines (especially at 
different view %), but they print evenly. (HP LaserJet 5100).

The differences between the various pages are apparent, but the lines 
are consistently even.

The same files viewed with Apple's Preview program (one that comes 
with OS X) look good on the screen at various % and also print fine.

Doesn't this imply that the main problem lies with the pdf viewing 
program and NOT Finale?

I invite others to duplicate or contradict my observations.
-Randolph Peters
P.S. Logic tells us, of course, that the problem could also be a 
combination of Finale and the wrong pdf program. The disturbing fact 
that there are major discrepancies between the various pdf viewing 
programs kind of defeats the whole purpose of pdfs!

At 2:39 PM +0100 1/20/05, d. collins wrote:

FWIW, I can't get a different result regarding the on-screen 
appearance regarding the width of the staff lines using this 
approach. I notice some other small differences though.
OK, I just posted a 3 page PDF:
- page 1 is printed directly to PDF from Finale
- page 2 is the same Finale file compiled as a Postscript listing 
and then distilled with exactly the same settings
- page 3 is a blank page printed to PDF from Sibelius

The difference on screen between the three pages are glaring. 
Comparing the print-outs of 1 and 2 with the same file printed 
directly from Finale on my HP Laserjet IIIP, page 1 has thicker 
lines than the original, and, worse, irregular staff lines. Page 2 
looks very close to the Finale output.

http://www.philomela.net/files/finale.pdf
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Stephen Onwood]

At 04:20 PM 1/19/2005, you wrote:
Well, FWIW, I use PDF995, and my printouts direct from Finale are
completely identical to printouts from its PDFs -- I've held them up
to the light to check. I can find no differeces whatsoever.
I also use PDF995 with WinFin 2004b, HPDeskjet 842c true type fonts at 
600dpi.   PDFs have noticably thicker lines which vary in thickness.  The 
quality of the printout is greatly inferior to Finale direct 
output.  8.5x11 on all print and document settings. No scaling.  I wonder 
why I don't get the same results as you do?  Zooming in on screen reveals 
that the fonts in the PDF aren't perfectly aligned either.

But I'm not printing to a PostScript printer (well, technically, I
am, just that I'm printing via PCL rather than PS, which I've found
to simply be more trouble than it's worth).
The problems are not with the software used, but with the
configurations that particular people are using. However, I don't
know exactly which factors would be at issue.
I would like to know what settings would improve the output, if that is 
indeed the problem.

regards,
Steve
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.1 - Release Date: 1/19/2005
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Richard Yates]

That should read 'below 100%' not '10%'.

- Original Message - 
From: "Richard Yates" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 5:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Finale] PDF disaster


> >The second sample looks more like a screen shot from Finale than from a
> PDF.<
>
> Oops. You're right. Sorry, I did all of that too quickly.
>
> Here are several screen shots at different screen magnifications in
Acrobat.
> Below 10% does have uneven lines but it is too small for useful viewing
> anyway.
>
> http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screen100.gif
> http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screen125.gif
> http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screen150.gif
> http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screen200.gif
> http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screen300.gif
>
> The pdf is at:
>
> http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screenPDF.gif
>
>
> RY
>
>
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/ScreenPDF.pdf
Richard's PDF example display with uneven staff line thickness on my 
system when viewed at 100%, 120%, 160%, 180%, 200% (140% works).

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 05:58 AM 1/20/05 -0800, you wrote:
> http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/ScreenPDF.pdf

With smoothing off, this suffers from the same problems at even multiples
(100%, 200%, 400%) and at anything lower than 100%, but is otherwise cleaner.

Have we isolated anything yet? :)

(The other) Dennis



___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 04:22 PM 1/20/05 +0100, you wrote:
>Here are screen shots of six different magnifications, with the pages 
>facing each other:
>www.philomela.net/files/61.gif
>www.philomela.net/files/75.gif
>www.philomela.net/files/100.gif
>www.philomela.net/files/125.gif
>www.philomela.net/files/150.gif
>www.philomela.net/files/200.gif

What are these facing each other?

(The other) Dennis


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 05:58 AM 1/20/05 -0800, you wrote:
>The pdf is at:
>http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screenPDF.gif

http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/ScreenPDF.pdf


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Richard Yates]

Interesting. Pg 1 is bad at all magnifications below 300% and in any Acrobat
Reader from 4.0 through 7.0. To compare these things across setups I think
we need to know the staff size / line thickness / reductions in Finale.

>http://www.philomela.net/files/finale.pdf

>Comments appreciated.

>Dennis


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Richard Yates]

>The second sample looks more like a screen shot from Finale than from a
PDF.<

Oops. You're right. Sorry, I did all of that too quickly.

Here are several screen shots at different screen magnifications in Acrobat.
Below 10% does have uneven lines but it is too small for useful viewing
anyway.

http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screen100.gif
http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screen125.gif
http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screen150.gif
http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screen200.gif
http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screen300.gif

The pdf is at:

http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/screenPDF.gif


RY


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

d. collins wrote:
Is there any such thing?

You mentioned a problem with "non standard line widths", hence my question.
I meant common fractions based on points, such as 1/2 points, 3/4 points 
and so on.


OK, I just posted a 3 page PDF:
- page 1 is printed directly to PDF from Finale
- page 2 is the same Finale file compiled as a Postscript listing and 
then distilled with exactly the same settings
- page 3 is a blank page printed to PDF from Sibelius

The difference on screen between the three pages are glaring. 
On my system, ALL THREE pages display with different staff line widths, 
the results varies depending on zoom percentage.
Here are some screen shots based on your PDF:
http://www.jwmusic.nu/page1.gif
http://www.jwmusic.nu/page2.gif
http://www.jwmusic.nu/page3.gif

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 09:34 AM 1/20/05 -0500, you wrote:
>Checking smooth line art unchecked fuzzies up the edges

That should read "Checking smooth line art fuzzies up the edges"

Mornings. Bah.

Dennis



___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 02:39 PM 1/20/05 +0100, d. collins wrote:
>OK, I just posted a 3 page PDF:
>- page 1 is printed directly to PDF from Finale
>- page 2 is the same Finale file compiled as a Postscript listing and then 
>distilled with exactly the same settings
>- page 3 is a blank page printed to PDF from Sibelius

I have Acrobat Reader 5.

With 'smooth line art' unchecked, your examples all have distinctly
irregular line thicknesses on my screen. Sibelius has fewer at 100%, but
they get worse at higher magnification -- not equal until 1000%. Finale #2
has the same problem, but it's not as bad. Finale #1 gets better at
intermediate magnifications, but at 1200% is irregular again. 

Checking smooth line art unchecked fuzzies up the edges, and at least makes
it look somewhat balanced at 100%.

At 01:24 PM 1/20/05 +0100, Jari Williamsson wrote:
>Printwise, I think so. Try to print:
>http://www.jwmusic.nu/linesample.pdf
>to A4. On my printer, the staff lines have the same width.

On-screen, the lines are still irregular in Acrobat 5 -- very noticeable at
100%. And just as ugly as mine or Dennis's.

All the examples print with irregular line thicknesses, but I'm attributing
that to the resolution of the non-PS laser printer.

I've posted the screen shots of the above files here:
http://maltedmedia.com/images/finale/

(The other) Dennis







___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

One more thing:
If you haven't, make sure that you have "Smooth Line Art" set in Acrobat 
Preferences. This makes the on-screen appearance MUCH better!
(Although it doesn't explain why Mac-created files get better results 
without onscreen smoothing).

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

d. collins wrote:
What do you mean by "real-world" measurement?
The end-result thickness/measurement (that is sent to the PDF) when all 
resizing has been taken into account.

How do measurements work in Finale? What's the basic unit?
The most common unit for line thicknesses and such is what's technically 
called an EFIX = 1/256th of a point.

What are "standard line widths"?
Is there any such thing?
Could problems arise from the
> (staff, system, page) reduction in Finale?
I believe so. For example: I have one document where the staff line 
setting (in the Document Options dialog) is 3.5 EVPUs and the staff 
systems has a total reduction of 74%. This would result in a "real" 
staff line width of 0.6475 points (=0.875 * 0.74).

Do you have a good (screenwise and printwise) PDF
> you could post somewhere?
Screenwise, I don't think so.
Printwise, I think so. Try to print:
http://www.jwmusic.nu/linesample.pdf
to A4. On my printer, the staff lines have the same width.
But the comparative tests I've done between Powerpoint and Finale are 
identical when I use the same measurements and the same print-to-PDF method.

And one interesting discovery:
I can get EXCELLENT staff lines if I compile a PS listing* and distill 
it, with the same file that gives lousy sceen views and lousy print-outs 
(on my admittedly lousy printer). This would even seem like a good 
work-around, except there are other problems (shorter dashes, for 
instance). And this doesn't work with TT or OT fonts, due to Finale's 
notorious font bug mentioned here in connection with EPS export.
FWIW, I can't get a different result regarding the on-screen appearance 
regarding the width of the staff lines using this approach. I notice 
some other small differences though.

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Johannes Gebauer]

Furthermore, perhaps you could share a Finale file with one of us Mac 
users, so we can make a PDF on the Mac to see what the difference to the 
Windows version is? I'd be happy to do that, but that would be a PDF 
made with OS X, without Acrobat Distiller (since I don't own Distiller). 
I am away from tomorrow, though, so I could only do it after Monday.

Perhaps Jari could try the same file, too, to see whether he has somehow 
managed to get better PDF results?

Johannes
d. collins wrote:
Johannes Gebauer écrit:
I'd really like to see the difference, you know. Is there a chance you 
could put up a PDF from Finale and a PDF from Sibelius, so that we 
could have a look and compare?

OK, I'll do that before the end of this week.
Dennis

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
--
http://www.musikmanufaktur.com
http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

d. collins wrote:
OK, I'll do that before the end of this week.
Make sure that you use the EXACT same space between staff lines and 
exactly the same staff line width (in REAL-WORLD measurement).

I just did a test in MS Powerpoint with 5 lines at 0.64 points. I can 
see the artifacts people seem to be mentioning there as well (at some 
view %) when viewing the PDF:
http://www.jwmusic.nu/powerpoint-lines.gif

To me this would suggest it is a Acrobat/Windows problem in combination 
with non-standard line widths.

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Owain Sutton]

d. collins wrote:
Owain Sutton écrit:
I really don't think that it's a Finale issue, but a Windows-based 
Acrobat one.  The fact that a PDF doesn't look perfect on screen 
shouldn't be an issue - it's a format intended for printing.  Now the 
problems people are describing on printouts are a different matter.

Then why doesn't this problem appear in any other software than Finale 
if it's an Acrobat issue? The fact that PDFs look bad on screen is an 
issue in itself, but a different one. But the fact is that the problem 
in the print-outs is exactly the same (line thickness and alignment).

Dennis


Not everybody *is* describing the same problem when printing out.  The 
staves on my PDFs look awful on screen, but there's no problem with the 
printout.  Some people are *also* having problems with printouts - but 
need to give us more details about all of the Finale & Acrobat settings 
before we can attribute blame.  (Perhaps we could do with somebody 
replicating a Finale stave setup on completely separate non-music 
software to see how that looks when printed to PDF?  I'd do it, but I'm 
not THAT interested ;) )  And the reason I find it hard to point the 
finger at Finale is that the PDF utilities aren't part of it!  It's 
unlikely to be Finale's fault if third-party software processes data 
inaccurately.
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[dhbailey]

d. collins wrote:
Owain Sutton écrit:
I really don't think that it's a Finale issue, but a Windows-based 
Acrobat one.  The fact that a PDF doesn't look perfect on screen 
shouldn't be an issue - it's a format intended for printing.  Now the 
problems people are describing on printouts are a different matter.

Then why doesn't this problem appear in any other software than Finale 
if it's an Acrobat issue? The fact that PDFs look bad on screen is an 
issue in itself, but a different one. But the fact is that the problem 
in the print-outs is exactly the same (line thickness and alignment).

Dennis
Have you tried using a graphics program to create music staves (since 
the line thickness seems to be a major issue) and then created a PDF 
from that?  That ought to help clarify if it's an Acrobat issue or a 
Finale-to-PDF issue.

--
David H. Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Randolph Peters]

There are some anomalies on the Mac side of things as well when it 
comes to printing and viewing pdfs.

I recently made a pdf of a Finale file using the new Acrobat 7 
Professional print driver. There were some note heads missing as well 
as missing staff lines here and there when viewing the file in 
Acrobat 7 or Acrobat 7 Reader. The results were the same on screen 
and in print.

I took the same file and opened it in the Apple Preview program 
instead of Acrobat and everything was there and it printed just fine.

Go figure.
-Randolph Peters
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Richard Yates]

>Why do Finale's PDFs look so terrible on screen? I have yet to see a recent
Finale
PDF with equal-sized staff-lines.

http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/PdfScreen1.gif

http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/PdfScreen2.gif

FinWin2004, Acrobat 4.0



___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[David W. Fenton]

On 19 Jan 2005 at 17:37, Jari Williamsson wrote:

> Simon Troup wrote:
> 
> > I've been reading through this thread and find
>  > it inexplicable. In no way can I produce the results
>  > of which people are complaining. I've tried several
>  > methods and they all produce excellent quality PDF
> > files. Any PDF file I produce then print is
> > identical in every respect to the printout straight
>  > from Finale.
> 
> I think this might be a Windows-only issue.

Well, FWIW, I use PDF995, and my printouts direct from Finale are 
completely identical to printouts from its PDFs -- I've held them up 
to the light to check. I can find no differeces whatsoever.

But I'm not printing to a PostScript printer (well, technically, I 
am, just that I'm printing via PCL rather than PS, which I've found 
to simply be more trouble than it's worth).

The problems are not with the software used, but with the 
configurations that particular people are using. However, I don't 
know exactly which factors would be at issue. It could be something 
to do with certain print resolutions being supported in direct 
printing in a manner that is different from what happens when 
printing to your PDF-producing program. Of course, if you're all 
using PostScript for your printers by default, that would really be 
counterintuitive, since it ought to be the same PS output in both 
cases.

Clearly, for some reason, it isn't.

Is it possible to "decompile" a PDF and look at the PS inside?

-- 
David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton
David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Johannes Gebauer]

I'd really like to see the difference, you know. Is there a chance you 
could put up a PDF from Finale and a PDF from Sibelius, so that we could 
have a look and compare?

Johannes
d. collins wrote:
Jari Williamsson écrit:
I have to disagree with your conclusions. There are many Windows 
Finale copyists etc who rely exclusively on PDF output.

So do I. But I still think Finale's PDF output is crappy, compared to 
that of Sibelius or any other graphic software I've been  able to test. 
Why do Finale's PDFs look so terrible on screen? I have yet to see a 
recent Finale PDF with equal-sized staff-lines. If you or anyone else 
has one, I'd love to see it along with the details of the settings. If 
you happen to have a sample, I'd appreciate it if you could send it 
privately. The only good looking Finale PDFs I see all come from Macs.

Dennis


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
--
http://www.musikmanufaktur.com
http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 09:52 PM 1/19/05 +, Owain Sutton wrote:
>I really don't think that it's a Finale issue, but a Windows-based 
>Acrobat one.  The fact that a PDF doesn't look perfect on screen 
>shouldn't be an issue - it's a format intended for printing.  Now the 
>problems people are describing on printouts are a different matter.

I mentioned earlier about the PDF output of other Windows programs looking
fine in print (as do Finale PDFs, though not exactly like the direct
printed output from Finale). Other programs' PDF results also look fine *on
screen*. It's only the Finale output that's a mess.

(The other) Dennis




___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Owain Sutton]

d. collins wrote:
Jari Williamsson écrit:
I have to disagree with your conclusions. There are many Windows 
Finale copyists etc who rely exclusively on PDF output.

So do I. But I still think Finale's PDF output is crappy, compared to 
that of Sibelius or any other graphic software I've been  able to test. 
Why do Finale's PDFs look so terrible on screen? I have yet to see a 
recent Finale PDF with equal-sized staff-lines. If you or anyone else 
has one, I'd love to see it along with the details of the settings. If 
you happen to have a sample, I'd appreciate it if you could send it 
privately. The only good looking Finale PDFs I see all come from Macs.


I really don't think that it's a Finale issue, but a Windows-based 
Acrobat one.  The fact that a PDF doesn't look perfect on screen 
shouldn't be an issue - it's a format intended for printing.  Now the 
problems people are describing on printouts are a different matter.
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Mark D Lew]

On Jan 19, 2005, at 8:37 AM, Jari Williamsson wrote:
I've been reading through this thread and find
> it inexplicable. In no way can I produce the results
> of which people are complaining. I've tried several
> methods and they all produce excellent quality PDF
files. Any PDF file I produce then print is
identical in every respect to the printout straight
> from Finale.
I think this might be a Windows-only issue.
My experience would back that up. I'm on Mac Fin 2k2, and I can't tell 
the difference between my PDF printouts and my Finale printouts.

mdl
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[A-NO-NE Music]

I am on Mac for Finale, and PDF is also my choice of delivery, but I just
tried it on Win to see if I can reproduce this thread.

WinFin2005/Win2KSP4

Yup.  It's terrible!


-- 

- Hiro

Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA
 


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

d. collins wrote:
I'm using 6, but the problem was the same with 5. This problem only 
arises in Finale, and not in any other software (Sibelius, or any 
graphic software). So I'm convinced it has to do with Finale's 
postscript output, that has always been disastrous under Windows. It's 
incredible that a software used professionally has such a poor graphic 
output. And for something as simple as staff lines.
I have to disagree with your conclusions. There are many Windows Finale 
copyists etc who rely exclusively on PDF output.

FWIW, when trying to "print to PDF" using various douments and Finale 
versions I was accidentally able to reproduce exactly what you 
described. What happend was that the Finale pages was set to Letter and 
the Acrobat driver was A4 - this resulted in a PDF that never had equal 
staff lines unless I zoomed in _real_ close.

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 04:10 PM 1/19/05 +, Simon Troup wrote:

>I've been reading through this thread and find it inexplicable.
> OSX native PDF's - "Print > PDF"
> Distilled PDFS - "Compile Postscript Listing" then pass on to Distiller.
> PDF's from EPS "Export EPS" then save as PDF from illustrator.
>"Print > PDF" = Correct PDF
>"Compile Postscripts Listing" to distiller = Correct PDF
>No difference between finale printout and PDF (onscreen and print).

Print to PDF (using Distiller's PDF printer) = Failure (error message "[
Error: undefined; OffendingCommand: AdobePS_Win_Compat ]"; no output)
Compile Postscript Listing to Distiller = Failure (error message "[ Error:
undefined; OffendingCommand: AdobePS_Win_Compat ]"; no output)
Print to Postscript, then Distill = Completed with variable results, never
same as direct Finale output.

Win98SE (carried through same problems since Win3.1, 95, 95OSR2)
Finale 2003 (carried through same problems since Finale 2.2, 3.0, 3.5, 3.7,
97, 2000, 2001, 2002)
Xerox P12, Lexmark E210, HP1220C, HP3425 (carried through same problems
since Canon BJ-1).
ECRM Mako, IBM InfoPrint 4000 (print shop printers; same problems)

Dennis


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

Simon Troup wrote:
I've been reading through this thread and find
> it inexplicable. In no way can I produce the results
> of which people are complaining. I've tried several
> methods and they all produce excellent quality PDF
files. Any PDF file I produce then print is
identical in every respect to the printout straight
> from Finale.
I think this might be a Windows-only issue.
Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Simon Troup]

> At 10:57 PM 1/18/05 +0100, d. collins wrote:
> I'm about ready to throw in the Finale towel and switch to Sibelius!
> I can't get Finale to produce decent PDF files: not only do they
> look terrible on screen, with staff (and other) lines of different
> thicknesses, but I just noticed they print out the same way on a HP
> Laserjet (non postscript).

I've been reading through this thread and find it inexplicable. In no way can I 
produce the results of which people are complaining. I've tried several methods 
and they all produce excellent quality PDF files. Any PDF file I produce then 
print is identical in every respect to the printout straight from Finale.

1) OSX native PDF's - "Print > PDF"
2) Distilled PDFS - "Compile Postscript Listing" then pass on to Distiller.
3) PDF's from EPS "Export EPS" then save as PDF from illustrator.

I've used all these methods a lot for one reason or another, never even a hint 
of a problem.

It may be of benefit if everyone lists their system and printers etc to see if 
we can see a link. Here's mine for what it's worth.

--
Max OSX 10.3.7
Finale 2005a
HP 5siMX Laser (Postscript)

"Print > PDF" = Correct PDF
"Compile Postscripts Listing" to distiller = Correct PDF
No difference between finale printout and PDF (onscreen and print).
--

Simon Troup
Digital Music Art

-
Finale IRC channel
server: irc.chatspike.net
port: 6667
channel: #Finale
-

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 10:57 PM 1/18/05 +0100, d. collins wrote:
>I'm about ready to throw in the Finale towel and switch to Sibelius! I 
>can't get Finale to produce decent PDF files: not only do they look 
>terrible on screen, with staff (and other) lines of different thicknesses, 
>but I just noticed they print out the same way on a HP Laserjet (non 
>postscript).

I've been reading along, because I need to produce decent PDF files as
well. I gave up with the on-screen presentation several Finales ago. It
looks terrible at screen size.

My printouts are very good. Still, they never match the Finale direct
printouts. I really don't know the machinations of Postscript with regard
to graphics, and it's only the Finale graphics that seem the problem --
beams, stems, staff lines, slurs, etc. The fonts are fine.

By increasing the resolution at which the original document is 'printed' to
file, I can get close to the results of a direct print from Finale. But
there are so many variables in the chain (at least five setup screens:
Finale page setup, the virtual Postscript printer dialog, Finale print
dialog, Distiller setup, Acrobat reader print dialog) that it is a constant
source of botched results if I forget to use a preset I've made.

I have Xerox and Brother laser printers and two HP inkjet printers, and
also bring files to the local Mailboxes Etc, which has a large laser unit.
The results of Finale graphics from printer to printer are never the same.
I simply can't trust Finale's output.

This is all a Finale-specific issue, isn't it? I do book editing and
design, and have done several books from Pagemaker (and even one from
MSWord) for on-demand book printing, and what I expect to have printed is
exactly what I get -- an important factor if the printer is half a
continent away and we're about to do a run of 1,000 books. I produce
newsletters, posters, booklets and magazines, and copy-edit publications
for which I get PDF galleys. PDF results even from a multi-layered original
in $60 worth of Paint Shop Pro are perfect -- fonts, vector graphics, and all.

I never have trouble producing printer-ready PDFs except with Finale.

Does anyone have a factual explanation for this beyond, say, programming
incompetence over the past decade or so? I can't imagine that producing
Finale output is more complicated than, say, a roadmap with symbols, raster
and vector graphics, shadowing, and text rendered as a flat map for
proofing and as four CMYK plates for printing.

Dennis

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

Richard Yates wrote:
No problems with FinWin of any era and Acrobat 4.0, Brother model HL-1650
1200dpi laser printer. Send me a pdf file also if you want to try on this
printer.
One thought here: Perhaps this problem is related to Acrobat 6 (or some 
special settings in Acrobat 6) in some way? What Acrobat version are you 
using, Dennis?

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Richard Yates]

>By the way, how do your PDFs look on screen, staff-line-wise?<

http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/PdfScreen1.gif

http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/PdfScreen2.gif

Richard Yates

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Richard Yates]

No problems with FinWin of any era and Acrobat 4.0, Brother model HL-1650
1200dpi laser printer. Send me a pdf file also if you want to try on this
printer.

Richard Yates

> Does anyone else have the same problem, which is typically Windows, I
> assume? I'd appreciate it if you could tell me whether you notice any
> important differences between a direct print-out from Finale and a
> print-out via a PDF (made Acrobat or not), and what type of printer you're
> using.


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

RE: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Stephen Onwood]

At 02:35 PM 1/18/2005, Jim Williams wrote:
Listmates...
I have had excellent luck with a print driver called PDF995. It renders 
PDFs well and quickly from WinFin 2004.
Is it as nice as an original from Finale itself? Probably not . . .
I too use PDF995 and it does a fair job, but the printout is not as crisp 
as direct Finale output.  Every thing prints a little thicker and the lines 
(particularly the staff lines) do indeed print at slightly varying 
thicknesses.  Also when you zoom in various elements aren't as well lined 
up. For instance flags and beams do not align precisely with the stems and 
likewise stems with note heads.  Finale is not always perfect in this 
regard but the PDFs are a couple of pixels or so further misaligned.

PDT995 works ok for e-mailing files to those who don't have Finale (or have 
an older version) But it would be nice to have better PDF output to provide 
print-ready files for the print shop.  Any suggestions or better solutions 
that you power users might have would be greatly appreciated.

I have also used PrimoPDF with the same results.
d. collins wrote:
> I can't get Finale to produce decent PDF files: not only do 
they look
> terrible on screen, with staff (and other) lines of different
> thicknesses, but I just noticed they print out the same way on a HP
> Laserjet (non postscript). The staff lines are much thicker 
than in the
> print-out directly from Finale and the thickness varies from 
one line to
> another. Same thing for word extensions.
The variation I notice is slight.
I have Acrobat 5 and a HP LaserJet 2000M and I have never had this
problem. However, what you describe sounds like a vertical 
stretch issue
somewhere along the line - some places to start looking:
1. Compare page size in Finale document against Distiller page size.
2. Look in Acrobat printer settings so there isn't stretching 
going on there
This isn't the problem with me either since page setting are the same and 
there is no stretch.

Regards,
SteveO

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.0 - Release Date: 1/17/2005
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Owain Sutton]

I too have had no such problems (Win XP, Finale 2003, Acrobat 6, HP 
LaserJet 1005). The sole exception has been when the Finale file is 
8.5"x11", and it's being printed to A4, which works out at about 96% 
size - apparently an awkward-enough value to cause stave line thinkness 
at 600dpi.


Jari Williamsson wrote:
d. collins wrote:
I just checked, and both Finale and Acrobat are set to A4, and so is 
my printer. And I don't see any stretching settings in Acrobat.

"Shrink oversized paper to paper size" and "Expand small pages to paper 
size" options in Acrobat printing could perhaps both cause distortion.

Is your Laserjet a PS printer or not? What's your resolution in DPI?

I got it wrong in my previous mail, it a HP2100M. It has both PS and 
PCL, but I print almost all the time in PCL. 1200 DPI.

If you continue to have problems here, can you send me a Finale file 
privately?

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

d. collins wrote:
I just checked, and both Finale 
and Acrobat are set to A4, and so is my printer. And I don't see any 
stretching settings in Acrobat.
"Shrink oversized paper to paper size" and "Expand small pages to paper 
size" options in Acrobat printing could perhaps both cause distortion.

Is your Laserjet a PS printer or not? What's your resolution in DPI?
I got it wrong in my previous mail, it a HP2100M. It has both PS and 
PCL, but I print almost all the time in PCL. 1200 DPI.

If you continue to have problems here, can you send me a Finale file 
privately?

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

RE: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Williams, Jim]

Listmates...
I have had excellent luck with a print driver called PDF995. It renders PDFs 
well and quickly from WinFin 2004.
Is it as nice as an original from Finale itself? Probably not, but professional 
players have received them from me and not complained. I havent printed the PDF 
995 output on a first-rate printer yet, though.
In my case, I use the PDFs as a "copy protection" and/or "re-arranging 
protection" mechanism for people to whom I email my scores & parts, so total 
elegance is not a strict requirement.
You get a nag screen if you don't pay the 9.95.  It's worth $9.95 in terms of 
reduced frustration alone.
Jim W.

-Original Message- 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Jari Williamsson 
Sent: Tue 18-Jan-05 17:25 
To: finale@shsu.edu 
    Cc: 
Subject: Re: [Finale] PDF disaster



d. collins wrote:
> I can't get Finale to produce decent PDF files: not only do they look
> terrible on screen, with staff (and other) lines of different
> thicknesses, but I just noticed they print out the same way on a HP
> Laserjet (non postscript). The staff lines are much thicker than in 
the
> print-out directly from Finale and the thickness varies from one line 
to
> another. Same thing for word extensions.

I have Acrobat 5 and a HP LaserJet 2000M and I have never had this
problem. However, what you describe sounds like a vertical stretch issue
somewhere along the line - some places to start looking:
1. Compare page size in Finale document against Distiller page size.
2. Look in Acrobat printer settings so there isn't stretching going on 
there

Best regards,

Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale


<>___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] PDF disaster

[Jari Williamsson]

d. collins wrote:
I can't get Finale to produce decent PDF files: not only do they look 
terrible on screen, with staff (and other) lines of different 
thicknesses, but I just noticed they print out the same way on a HP 
Laserjet (non postscript). The staff lines are much thicker than in the 
print-out directly from Finale and the thickness varies from one line to 
another. Same thing for word extensions.
I have Acrobat 5 and a HP LaserJet 2000M and I have never had this 
problem. However, what you describe sounds like a vertical stretch issue 
somewhere along the line - some places to start looking:
1. Compare page size in Finale document against Distiller page size.
2. Look in Acrobat printer settings so there isn't stretching going on there

Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale