version 6 Plot3D exporting results in HUGE files

290 views
Skip to first unread message

J Davis

unread,
Aug 26, 2007, 3:35:22 AM8/26/07
to
I did the following in v6.0.1 (which I will refer to as v6 hereafter):
generated a surface using the Plot3D command, clicked on the resulting
surface graphic, then Save Selection As > EPS.

The resulting EPS file was over 4400 KB!

I compiled the same code in v5.2 using the exact same steps. The
resulting EPS file was 700 KB.

This is immaterial except now when I include the EPS files in a LaTeX
document and convert the dvi file to either PS or PDF, the pages with
v6 generated surfaces render EXTREMELY slowly while the v5.2 generated
surfaces render very quickly.

Has anyone noticed the same thing? This is very disappointing for
someone who wants to use Mathematica to generate high quality graphics
for inclusion in technical documents.

I am running Mathematica v6.0.1 on Windows XP on a Dell Latitude D800.

FYI, the same behavior occurs in v6 if I Save As>PDF instead of going
the EPS route.

Thanks for any insight you may have.

JD


J Davis

unread,
Aug 26, 2007, 4:34:29 AM8/26/07
to

ragfield

unread,
Aug 26, 2007, 11:11:29 PM8/26/07
to
On Aug 26, 3:34 am, J Davis <texasAUti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I did the following in v6.0.1 (which I will refer to as v6 hereafter):
> generated a surface using the Plot3D command, clicked on the resulting
> surface graphic, then Save Selection As > EPS.
>
> The resulting EPS file was over 4400 KB!


The root of the problem is that most 3D plotting functions in
Mathematica 6 produce graphics that contain features that are not
(well) supported by EPS or PDF, most notably VertexColors.
Mathematica therefore has a few different ways to deal with this
problem, none of them ideal. Click on the "Options..." button in the
"Save Selection As..." dialog to see the following choices for
graphics containing VertexColors and Opacity:

* Use Bitmap Representation. This matches what you see in Mathematica
exactly, but produces large files that are resolution dependent
(albeit at a fairly high resolution). This is what you're probably
seeing.

* Use Highest Quality Vector Representation. This should match what
you see in Mathematica nearly exactly, but it will not be compatible
with all viewer applications. For PS/EPS this uses PS level 3
features. For PDF it uses features that are not supported by Apple's
PDF engine prior to Mac OS X 10.5.

* Use Most Compatible Vector Representation. This will not exactly
match what you see on screen in Mathematica, but it will produce a
small file that works in all viewers.

-Rob


Helen Read

unread,
Aug 26, 2007, 11:23:59 PM8/26/07
to

I just tried this (in v6), and found Save As>PDF or Export["blah.pdf",
blah] to be substantially smaller than saving or exporting to EPS.

For my example I used Plot3D[Sin[x y], {x, -5, 5}, {y, -5, 5}]

Export .eps: 5425 KB
Export .pdf: 1079 KB
SaveAs .eps: 5711 KB
SaveAs .pdf: 1068 KB


--
Helen Read
University of Vermont

J Davis

unread,
Aug 26, 2007, 11:34:10 PM8/26/07
to
On Aug 26, 3:34 am, J Davis <texasAUti...@gmail.com> wrote:

Slight correction... the v5.2 EPS was only 70k, not 700k.


J Davis

unread,
Aug 28, 2007, 2:30:41 AM8/28/07
to

Yes, but these are still MUCH larger file sizes than I got from 5.2.
Even exported PDF graphics when embedded in a LaTeX doc and pdfLaTeX-
ed created files which were abnormally slow when scrolling between
pages.


J Davis

unread,
Aug 28, 2007, 2:31:41 AM8/28/07
to

Rob,

I tried the latter two options and the file sizes were still huge
(option 3 was almost 4mb and option 2 was a whopping 22 mb!).

This is a serious flaw for anyone who uses v6 to generate surfaces for
inclusion in LaTeX papers, etc.

I am rather surprised others haven't reported issues with this.

Any other insight you can add is appreciated.

JD


Albert

unread,
Aug 28, 2007, 6:43:04 AM8/28/07
to
Hi,

> Yes, but these are still MUCH larger file sizes than I got from 5.2.
> Even exported PDF graphics when embedded in a LaTeX doc and pdfLaTeX-
> ed created files which were abnormally slow when scrolling between
> pages.

I have no time to investigate this, but maybe you want to try to use

<<Version5`Graphics`

to get back to the old Graphics-System within version 6 and see whether
you can get back the old smaller files when exporting these Graphics. I
know this is no real solution of your problem and of course you can't
make use of some new features (like opacity). On the other hand,
considering that the new graphics have features that postscript doesn't
support there might not be a good "solution" anyway...

hth,

albert

J Davis

unread,
Aug 29, 2007, 4:14:16 AM8/29/07
to
On Aug 28, 5:43 am, Albert <a...@arcor.net> wrote:
> Hi,

>
> > Yes, but these are still MUCH larger file sizes than I got from 5.2.
> > Even exported PDF graphics when embedded in a LaTeX doc and pdfLaTeX-
> > ed created files which were abnormally slow when scrolling between
> > pages.
>
> I have no time to investigate this, but maybe you want to try to use
>
> <<Version5`Graphics`
>
> to get back to the old Graphics-System within version 6 and see whether
> you can get back the old smaller files when exporting these Graphics. I
> know this is no real solution of your problem and of course you can't
> make use of some new features (like opacity). On the other hand,
> considering that the new graphics have features that postscript doesn't
> support there might not be a good "solution" anyway...
>
> hth,
>
> albert

Albert,

Thus far that has worked. Thank you very much!

Seems like postscript compatibility should be on Wolfram's "to do"
list. ;-)

Best,
JD


Paul...@googlemail.com

unread,
Aug 29, 2007, 4:17:18 AM8/29/07
to
Hi,
I had the same problem, the eps-files were really huge. I tried
eps2eps. This shrinks the eps sometimes to less than 50% of the origin
eps-size!

Cheers,
Paul


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages