Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Software for technical illustrations

On 7/11/04 1:56 AM, Fred Smith wrote:

>You also fail to see when somebody agrees with you. ;-)

Probably. I don't think I denied being a grouch. ;-)

>There may be other things in documentation within a .doc file that
>are not simple lines like pictures of machined parts. These will be
>best displayed with jpg.

I don't disagree with that, but I don't think a .doc file is the absolute best
way to go. To each his own.

>I would blame Acad for as much as possible. ;-)

Only because they deserve it. ;-)

>> My 6.3 K png turned into a
>> tif that is 876 K.
>
>This is an operator issue, not a tiff issue.

I was just using default settings for ImageMagick. I'd imagine you can get
better results with Photoshop, but that's a lot of dough for the average guy.

>Here is a link that may give you a hint about Tiff in ps and pdf...

I'm not convinced. I've hunted around for documentation, but can't find anything
that I understand. It does seem suspicious that every postscript file I've tried
to convert to pdf turns out to be nearly the same size. And also, the standard
free pdf converter is GhostScript, which surprisingly rhymes with PostScript.

The only reason I'm continuing to yammer about this is that it's interesting to
me (and hopefully somebody else). I've been using an ancient version 2
postscript spec to programmatically write out a complex curve as a vector file
that can be read back into a cad program. But since postscript printers aren't
that common in PC-land, packaging it inside a pdf works nicely. It can be
printed out exactly to the scale that I've drawn it, and it can be opened in
many cad and graphics programs.


Hal Eckhart - Casa Forge - Minneapolis MN - <http://www.casaforge.com>