Re: [GRASS-user] ps.map Advice
If you really need to have full control on your "virtual printer" output, have a look at gs arguments : http://www.ghostscript.com/doc/7.07/Use.htm > you might calculate what resolution gives you 300dpi by measuring the > width of the printed map box in inches and multiplying by the desired > dpi. any thing more than that is wasted disk space, > Hamish Well, in the context of high quality press output it's a bit more delicate ; depends on what image you produce (b&w, grayscale, color), what printing device it is (inkjet printer, laser printer, offset press... each having different lineature values and different frame types), and paper quality. Then, as you say, 300 dpi : * is most often enough for common color map printing * should be increased to 600 dpi for b&w images e.g. text+thin black contour lines on a white bg to be sent on a laser printer, andbut should be considered the least acceptable resolution for high quality paper production. I agree that it's useless beyond 600 dpi. Yours, Vincent. ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Re: [GRASS-user] ps.map Advice
Rich: > I suppose that for printed output purposes (separate from analytical > purposes), I can make the resolution even more coarse. > > Sure enough. 20m resolution makes a 0.5M pdf and the page looks just as > good as it did before. ... > Running 'g.region -m' revealed that the resolutions were much too fine: > about 2m each direction. I changed that to 10m for both nsres and ewres and > the final .pdf is about 2.8M. I suppose that for printed output purposes > (separate from analytical purposes), I can make the resolution even more > coarse. you might calculate what resolution gives you 300dpi by measuring the width of the printed map box in inches and multiplying by the desired dpi. any thing more than that is wasted disk space, anything less causes a cruddier printout. be aware that many ps->pdf converters silently convert your image to a 72dpi jpeg or so; if you want higher quality you have to pass ghostscript/whatever some extra flags: http://grass.osgeo.org/wiki/Ps.map_scripts#Converting_PostScript_to_PDF > Once I get the system down I'll output to .eps for inclusion in LaTeX. beware that if you use .eps instead of .ps that any SCALE 1:xx,xxx written on your map will become invalid. (with .ps we can guarantee that 1" is 1" when printed) Hamish ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Re: [GRASS-user] ps.map Advice
I use ps.map only to export vectors to postscript. I then use v.in.region to create a box to show the region for any raster data (which is what takes up all the room in your postscript output), then use r.out.tif or whatever to dump the raster as a separate tif file; then merge the two in Adobe Illustrator (which is what I use for final map composition). An extra step, but gives lots of control. Nick Cahill On Jan 4, 2010, at 1:26 PM, Rich Shepard wrote: > The output files from ps.map are huge: the .ps is about 665M and the .pdf > is 9.9M. Way too large! > > The DEM is at 10m cell size. 'g.region -p' produces: > > projection: 99 (Lambert Conformal Conic) > zone: 0 > datum: nad83 > ellipsoid: grs80 > north: 1334419.15160578 > south: 1279151.24118496 > west: 769192.92822895 > east: 819255.9236 > nsres: 7.49700358 > ewres: 3.37898187 > rows: 7372 > cols: 14816 > cells: 109223552 > > This has fewer cells than the source raster DEM covering a larger region > (18,724 rows, 24,657 columns, 461,677,668 cells). > > Should I change the nsres and ewres to 10.0? Should I change the number of > rows and columns? Your advice is needed to produce high quality output at > reasonable .pdf size. > > Rich > ___ > grass-user mailing list > grass-user@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Re: [GRASS-user] ps.map Advice -- ANSWERED
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, Rich Shepard wrote: I suppose that for printed output purposes (separate from analytical purposes), I can make the resolution even more coarse. Sure enough. 20m resolution makes a 0.5M pdf and the page looks just as good as it did before. Rich ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
Re: [GRASS-user] ps.map Advice
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, Nick Cahill wrote: I use ps.map only to export vectors to postscript. I then use v.in.region to create a box to show the region for any raster data (which is what takes up all the room in your postscript output), then use r.out.tif or whatever to dump the raster as a separate tif file; then merge the two in Adobe Illustrator (which is what I use for final map composition). An extra step, but gives lots of control. Nick, The only Adobe product that runs on linux is acroread. Once I get the system down I'll output to .eps for inclusion in LaTeX. That's the tool I use for 99% of my writing. It's only when I have to send processed word documents to colleagues or agencies running Microsoft that I use OpenOffice.org's Writer. Running 'g.region -m' revealed that the resolutions were much too fine: about 2m each direction. I changed that to 10m for both nsres and ewres and the final .pdf is about 2.8M. I suppose that for printed output purposes (separate from analytical purposes), I can make the resolution even more coarse. Rich ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
[GRASS-user] ps.map Advice
The output files from ps.map are huge: the .ps is about 665M and the .pdf is 9.9M. Way too large! The DEM is at 10m cell size. 'g.region -p' produces: projection: 99 (Lambert Conformal Conic) zone: 0 datum: nad83 ellipsoid: grs80 north: 1334419.15160578 south: 1279151.24118496 west: 769192.92822895 east: 819255.9236 nsres: 7.49700358 ewres: 3.37898187 rows: 7372 cols: 14816 cells: 109223552 This has fewer cells than the source raster DEM covering a larger region (18,724 rows, 24,657 columns, 461,677,668 cells). Should I change the nsres and ewres to 10.0? Should I change the number of rows and columns? Your advice is needed to produce high quality output at reasonable .pdf size. Rich ___ grass-user mailing list grass-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
