On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 08:38:26PM +0100, Axel Wernicke wrote: > Am 09.01.2006 um 19:01 schrieb Marco Ciampa: > > >First of all: I'm not an expert...be gentle! > we do - as we do always - don't we :) > > >I've just noted that the 4 images present in images/using/ui-* are > >horribly scaled. A quick view at the english-pdf file showed me the > >reason since I tryed to create the same snapshots for the italian > >version and endedup with a pdf file with the images going outside > >the a4 > >margins. So the question is: > > No images are scaled for the pdf production recently. What I (we) did > was to set a different print *resolution* which always is "pixel per > something". So no pixel at all was harmed by this action !! But the images images/using/ui-* actually _are_ scaled, and in an horrible way! Check by yourself! If you do not mind I can correct the thing with the next checkout. > > - why not leaving the 1by1 pixel in the image? > > is it not possible to use a tag (for example) to tell the latex > >that > > that image must be scaled (for example by 1/2 or 1/3) for the > >printable > > version? In this manner the html pages _and_ the pdf pages would > >be better > > looking! > > Setting the print resolution means to define a real size for the > image in tex (pdf) without changing anything in the html output. Sure > one could also double each figure in the docbook and define one to be > used in html and on in tex (pdf), but this is very messy and puts > some kind of stylesheet into the xml. The whole idea of docbook is to > *separate* content and style, so its obviously not a good idea to do > the scaling in the xml files. You are absolutely right! I've managed to change the print resolution of the images to best values for the purpouse and it worked like a sharm. It seems that who created the aforementioned images was not aware of the right way to do this operation. > > - from the starting point that there are very important reasons not > > easily circunventeable to do in such manner, what are the > > rule of thumb for creating an image good for both the html _and_ > > the pdf versions? > > Limits in pixel? Valid either for A4 than Letter? > > Or for now it is best to simply do a try-compile-view cycle? > > The "Hints for making good screenshots" in the > > "TipsForContributing" > > do not mention this problem and I think that, whatever you experts > > decide, it is worth to ad a note.. > > Just do the figures as you did them in the past. Screenshots go 1:1 > into the html. There is a rule of thumb, that for the html the width > should not exceed 600px (IIRC). Additionally set the print resolution > to 144dpi and you are done. The only exception is if you have > examples that are very tiny (as most of the wilber examples are) or > you have some very tiny screen snippets (as some details from a > dialog window for example) - for them just leave the print resolution > unchanged (72dpi). When the tex (pdf) version of the manual is > produced, we'll have a critical view to image sizes anyway so if > there are further changes needed they can be done afterwards. > > Hope that brought some light to the issue... Axel, you were simply brilliant! I'll complete the wikipage too since I think that this issue is pretty important. -- Marco Ciampa +--------------------+ | Linux User #78271 | | FSFE fellow #364 | +--------------------+ _______________________________________________ Gimp-docs mailing list Gimp-docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-docs
