PS -> PDF font funnies
Rich Teer
I have a large (1200+ page) PostScript document that I need to
create a FAITHFUL PDF version of. The PostScript file was generated
using groff and I'm using ps2pdf to create the PDF.
The problem is, despite the fact that I'm using only standard
PostScript fonts, the fonts get slightly munged when I create
the PDF file. Most of it seems to work just fine, but subtle
things like the spacing for bullets sometimes go awry, as do
some ligatures. I hasten to add that not all bullets are wrong,
and not all ligatures are wrong!
I'm trying this on build 58 of Solaris 10 (though I doubt that
matters), with the following fonts and software versions:
%%IncludeResource: font AvantGarde-BookOblique
%%IncludeResource: font AvantGarde-DemiOblique
%%IncludeResource: font Helvetica-Bold
%%IncludeResource: font Palatino-Roman
%%IncludeResource: font Courier
%%IncludeResource: font Palatino-Italic
%%IncludeResource: font Palatino-Bold
%%IncludeResource: font Courier-Bold
GNU troff version 1.16.1 and Ghostscript 7.05
GNU groff version 1.19.1 and Ghostscript 7.07
Alternatively, how do I tell groff to embed the PostScript
fonts, so that someone else converting the file to PDF doesn't
need them installed on their computer?
If anyone has any ideas, I'm all ears!
Many TIA,
--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA
President,
Rite Online Inc.
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-online.net
Peter Wyzlic
> Hi all,
>
> I have a large (1200+ page) PostScript document that I need to
> create a FAITHFUL PDF version of. The PostScript file was generated
> using groff and I'm using ps2pdf to create the PDF.
>
> The problem is, despite the fact that I'm using only standard
> PostScript fonts, the fonts get slightly munged when I create
> the PDF file. Most of it seems to work just fine, but subtle
> things like the spacing for bullets sometimes go awry, as do
> some ligatures. I hasten to add that not all bullets are wrong,
> and not all ligatures are wrong!
>
> I'm trying this on build 58 of Solaris 10 (though I doubt that
> GNU troff version 1.16.1 and Ghostscript 7.05
> GNU groff version 1.19.1 and Ghostscript 7.07
Try the most recent version of ghostscript, especially the pdf parts of
it are under heavy development and often updated.
Or switch to Acrobat Distiller.
Bye
Peter
Ralf Koenig
> Hi all,
>
> I have a large (1200+ page) PostScript document that I need to
> create a FAITHFUL PDF version of. The PostScript file was generated
> using groff and I'm using ps2pdf to create the PDF.
>
> The problem is, despite the fact that I'm using only standard
> PostScript fonts, the fonts get slightly munged when I create
> the PDF file.
More exactly, you mean, you use only "fonts from the PS Level 2 Base 35
set".
> Most of it seems to work just fine, but subtle
> things like the spacing for bullets sometimes go awry, as do
> some ligatures. I hasten to add that not all bullets are wrong,
> and not all ligatures are wrong!
I guess, people would need access to the Postscript and PDF file to
assess this. Sounds like a metrics problem, but I wonder that these
problems seem to be of random nature and are not consistent. Have you
aggregated this large Postscript file from multiple sources?
> I'm trying this on build 58 of Solaris 10 (though I doubt that
> matters), with the following fonts and software versions:
>
> %%IncludeResource: font AvantGarde-BookOblique
> %%IncludeResource: font AvantGarde-DemiOblique
> %%IncludeResource: font Helvetica-Bold
> %%IncludeResource: font Palatino-Roman
> %%IncludeResource: font Courier
> %%IncludeResource: font Palatino-Italic
> %%IncludeResource: font Palatino-Bold
> %%IncludeResource: font Courier-Bold
>
>
> GNU troff version 1.16.1 and Ghostscript 7.05
> GNU groff version 1.19.1 and Ghostscript 7.07
>
> Alternatively, how do I tell groff to embed the PostScript
> fonts, so that someone else converting the file to PDF doesn't
> need them installed on their computer?
According to the PDF spec, only the following fonts can be relied on to
pre-exist on every PDF-compliant browser (Base 14):
- Courier (Roman,Bold,Italics,BoldItalics)
- Helvetiva (Roman,Bold,Italics,BoldItalics)
- Times (Roman,Bold,Italics,BoldItalics)
- Symbol
- ZapfDingbats
This means you MUST embed any other font so that the viewer has access
to it. In addition, problems seem to decrease, when you ADDITIONALLY
also embed "your" versions of the Base14 fonts.
I have no idea, how to instruct groff to embed the fonts, but I have
this alternative approach:
1. Make the Postscript file like you always did with groff, with no
embedded fonts but references to the fonts you mentioned above (they are
all part of the Base35 series).
This file should print fine on a Postscript *Level 2* laser printer,
because the printer finds all the fonts in the ROM. You can check by
printing the first say 20 pages of the document.
Additionally check with Ghostscript/GhostView, whether the file looks
right. You can also zoom in Ghostscript to find subtle details. Make
sure, Ghostscripts finds the PFB's or PFA's for all your used fonts. For
this reason Ghostscript comes with a package of the 35 base fonts. Check
that it is installed and used.
Compare the print-out and the screen view.
2. Use ps2pdf (which actually calls Ghostscript) to convert to PDF.
Instruct *Ghostscript* to embed all fonts in the PDF. Actually it should
do so by default for all non-Base14 fonts. Look inside the ps2pdf script
to see how gs is called. For debugging, copy the call of gs from there
and add '-dPDFWRDEBUG' to get debug messages from the pdfwriter.
You can upgrade to a newer Ghostscript version, if that is painless for
you but the current version should do the job just fine. The Distiller
by Adobe is not needed for this job, I guess.
Eventually, the problem is also with groff (or your use of groff)
because you describe the mistakes as random.
Ralf
--
Ralf Koenig, Professur Rechnernetze und verteilte Systeme
TU Chemnitz, Zi. 1/B320, Tel. 0371-531-1532
AES/newspost
Ralf Koenig <ralf....@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de> wrote:
> According to the PDF spec, only the following fonts can be relied on to
> pre-exist on every PDF-compliant browser (Base 14):
>
> - Courier (Roman,Bold,Italics,BoldItalics)
> - Helvetiva (Roman,Bold,Italics,BoldItalics)
> - Times (Roman,Bold,Italics,BoldItalics)
> - Symbol
> - ZapfDingbats
If you have the info readily at hand, could you help some of us Mac
users and PDF amateurs with advice on a couple or three add'l points:
1) Is there some known problem with certain characters in Helvetica?
I've had problems with Helvetica bullets turning into yen currency signs
in PowerPoint to PDF conversions and been told, oh, yes, that's a known
problem.
2) The distinction between Times and Times New Roman? Avoid one or the
other?
3) Geneva and Monaco not on this list? Are there common or widely used
PC/Windows equivalents to those? How widespread is Arial?
Thanks for any comments.
Aandi Inston
>2) The distinction between Times and Times New Roman? Avoid one or the
>other?
The only Times font in the base 14 fonts is Times, under its names
Times-Roman, Times-Bold, Times-Italic and Times-BoldItalic. No other
name is the same font.
>
>3) Geneva and Monaco not on this list?
No. Just those 14.
> Are there common or widely used
>PC/Windows equivalents to those?
This isn't a platform issue. Other fonts should be embedded.
----------------------------------------
Aandi Inston qu...@dial.pipex.com http://www.quite.com
Please support usenet! Post replies and follow-ups, don't e-mail them.
Rich Teer
> More exactly, you mean, you use only "fonts from the PS Level 2 Base 35
> set".
Yes; thanks for correcting my clumsy terminology!
> I guess, people would need access to the Postscript and PDF file to
> assess this. Sounds like a metrics problem, but I wonder that these
I agree about the metrics problem. The problem is consistent
in the document, but doesn't appear all the time. For example,
if I have a bulleted list, the first word of the list will often
line up with the subsequent lines (which is what I want), but other
times the first line is a bit close to the bullet than the other
lines in the same paragraph.
I hasten to add that the PS version looks just fine when printed
and when viewed on my screen.
> problems seem to be of random nature and are not consistent. Have you
> aggregated this large Postscript file from multiple sources?
Nope; it's actually an amalgamation of 20-odd chapters in a
book I've just finshied. But I'm performing tests on just
one chapter.
> > %%IncludeResource: font AvantGarde-BookOblique
> > %%IncludeResource: font AvantGarde-DemiOblique
> > %%IncludeResource: font Helvetica-Bold
> > %%IncludeResource: font Palatino-Roman
> > %%IncludeResource: font Courier
> > %%IncludeResource: font Palatino-Italic
> > %%IncludeResource: font Palatino-Bold
> > %%IncludeResource: font Courier-Bold
> This means you MUST embed any other font so that the viewer has access
> to it. In addition, problems seem to decrease, when you ADDITIONALLY
> also embed "your" versions of the Base14 fonts.
Ah, gotcha.
> 1. Make the Postscript file like you always did with groff, with no
> embedded fonts but references to the fonts you mentioned above (they are
> all part of the Base35 series).
>
> This file should print fine on a Postscript *Level 2* laser printer,
> because the printer finds all the fonts in the ROM. You can check by
> printing the first say 20 pages of the document.
Yes; my Lexmark laser printer supports Level 2 PostScript. I
think the problem is that my computer uses Display PostScript
(DPS), which my ghostscript installation is aware of. So, it
doesn't attempt to subsitute the real fonts with its own free
ones, because it "knows" that I have DPS. Similarly, the file
prints fine because I'm using the Base 35 set fonts, which are
supported natively on my printer.
> sure, Ghostscripts finds the PFB's or PFA's for all your used fonts. For
> this reason Ghostscript comes with a package of the 35 base fonts. Check
> that it is installed and used.
That's where the gotcha is: I don't have the PFBs. I guess one
solution would be to download the required Type 1 fonts from
Adobe, and then embed them.
> 2. Use ps2pdf (which actually calls Ghostscript) to convert to PDF.
> Instruct *Ghostscript* to embed all fonts in the PDF. Actually it should
> do so by default for all non-Base14 fonts. Look inside the ps2pdf script
> to see how gs is called. For debugging, copy the call of gs from there
> and add '-dPDFWRDEBUG' to get debug messages from the pdfwriter.
Yes, that's what I'm doing. By the looks of it, gs is substituting
free fonts for the Base 35 set ones that I'm using. But for some
reason, they're not identicle, and are hence causing me grief. :-(
> you but the current version should do the job just fine. The Distiller
> by Adobe is not needed for this job, I guess.
I think you're right. The PS -> PDF transformation works well
(including diagrams and tables), modulo the font screwups.
> Eventually, the problem is also with groff (or your use of groff)
> because you describe the mistakes as random.
Random was a poor choice of word. I'm introduciong the
problem elements in exactly the same way.
Many thanks for you help; any further light that you can
shed on this will be greatfully received!
In the meantine, I think I'll bite the bullet and see what
happens when I buy one of the problematic fonts from Adobe.
Aandi Inston
>That's where the gotcha is: I don't have the PFBs. I guess one
>solution would be to download the required Type 1 fonts from
>Adobe, and then embed them.
Adobe Type Basics, $99, is the most cost effective way in which Adobe
sell the base 35 fonts (+ some others). However, you can only download
Adobe Type Basics OpenType Edition. This has the same faces, but with
different names, so is no use to get the base 35 fonts.
George N. White III
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Ralf Koenig wrote:
>
>> More exactly, you mean, you use only "fonts from the PS Level 2 Base 35
>> set".
>
> Yes; thanks for correcting my clumsy terminology!
>
>> I guess, people would need access to the Postscript and PDF file to
>> assess this. Sounds like a metrics problem, but I wonder that these
>
> I agree about the metrics problem. The problem is consistent
> in the document, but doesn't appear all the time. For example,
> if I have a bulleted list, the first word of the list will often
> line up with the subsequent lines (which is what I want), but other
> times the first line is a bit close to the bullet than the other
> lines in the same paragraph.
>
> I hasten to add that the PS version looks just fine when printed
> and when viewed on my screen.
I reported spacing problems with troff output to the ghostscript
developers years ago. I just checked one of my test files with
gs-8.30 and the problem I saw using gs-7.03 was no longer present,
so upgrading may help.
If you buy fonts from Adobe today, you may not get the same versions
that were installed on some old unix system with DPS.
>> 2. Use ps2pdf (which actually calls Ghostscript) to convert to PDF.
>> Instruct *Ghostscript* to embed all fonts in the PDF. Actually it should
>> do so by default for all non-Base14 fonts. Look inside the ps2pdf script
>> to see how gs is called. For debugging, copy the call of gs from there
>> and add '-dPDFWRDEBUG' to get debug messages from the pdfwriter.
>
> Yes, that's what I'm doing. By the looks of it, gs is substituting
> free fonts for the Base 35 set ones that I'm using. But for some
> reason, they're not identicle, and are hence causing me grief. :-(
The free fonts are _not_ the same, but have been scaled so that
some of the metrics match. There have been reports of problems
with some versions of the URW fonts distributed with Linux, so
watch which versions of the fonts are being used.
If your documenents use Helvetica-Oblique you may have problems with
slanting of the special characters "(){}[]|\/". Adobe replaced
Helvetica-Oblique (a synthetic font) with Arial-Italic in the
free viewers.
Your best bet is to make very sure the same fonts are used in the
PS files and embedded in the PDF files. I don't recall offhand
if groff uses font metrics -- if so you will need to ensure that
they match the fonts.
--
George N. White III <aa...@chebucto.ns.ca>
Head of St. Margarets Bay, Nova Scotia, Canada
AES/newspost
qu...@dial.pipex.con (Aandi Inston) wrote:
> AES/newspost <sie...@stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> >2) The distinction between Times and Times New Roman? Avoid one or the
> >other?
>
> The only Times font in the base 14 fonts is Times, under its names
> Times-Roman, Times-Bold, Times-Italic and Times-BoldItalic. No other
> name is the same font.
Well, I've not paid much attention to font details on my Mac (still OS
9), just upgraded the system from time to time and purchased and
installed MS Office and various Adobe products; and I end up with a
"Times" font suitcase in my System folder that contains all of the
Roman, Bold, Italic, and BoldItalic variants, and also a "Times New
Roman" suitcase that contains Times New Roman, Times New Roman (bold),
Times New Roman (italic), and so on (not to mention Times CE, Times CY,
and Times RO suitcases as well.
So, should I be ditching one or more of those? Or if I use fonts from
the wrong "Times xxx" suitcase in a PDF document, will the results not
be recognized as "the real Times font" on other machines?
Rich Teer
> I reported spacing problems with troff output to the ghostscript
> developers years ago. I just checked one of my test files with
> gs-8.30 and the problem I saw using gs-7.03 was no longer present,
> so upgrading may help.
Ahh. I'm currently using gs 7.07, so it wouldn't be a bad idea
for me to check out the new version...
> The free fonts are _not_ the same, but have been scaled so that
> some of the metrics match. There have been reports of problems
> with some versions of the URW fonts distributed with Linux, so
> watch which versions of the fonts are being used.
Those URW fonts are the ones I'm using... :-/
> Your best bet is to make very sure the same fonts are used in the
> PS files and embedded in the PDF files. I don't recall offhand
> if groff uses font metrics -- if so you will need to ensure that
> they match the fonts.
It does.
Thanks,
Sid Steward
> Hi all,
>
> I have a large (1200+ page) PostScript document that I need to
> create a FAITHFUL PDF version of. The PostScript file was generated
> using groff and I'm using ps2pdf to create the PDF.
>
> The problem is, despite the fact that I'm using only standard
> PostScript fonts, the fonts get slightly munged when I create
> the PDF file. Most of it seems to work just fine, but subtle
> things like the spacing for bullets sometimes go awry, as do
> some ligatures. I hasten to add that not all bullets are wrong,
> and not all ligatures are wrong!
>
(snip)
>
> If anyone has any ideas, I'm all ears!
>
FWIW, I have experienced these symptoms when toying with the device
resolution settings on my Windows PostScript printer driver. They live
under the printer properties (Printing Preferences... > Advanced... >
Print Quality) on my Win2k machine.
Lowering this value too far (e.g., 150dpi) causes the resulting
PostScript page type (and drawings) to snap to an invisible grid, making
the page look bad. As you describe, it is not consistent across
character combinations.
Between the PostScript driver and (in my tests) Adobe Distiller, the
PostScript driver seems to have more influence over the resulting PDF's
precision.
Sid
Aandi Inston
>Well, I've not paid much attention to font details on my Mac (still OS
>9), just upgraded the system from time to time and purchased and
>installed MS Office and various Adobe products; and I end up with a
>"Times" font suitcase in my System folder that contains all of the
>Roman, Bold, Italic, and BoldItalic variants, and also a "Times New
>Roman" suitcase that contains Times New Roman, Times New Roman (bold),
>Times New Roman (italic), and so on (not to mention Times CE, Times CY,
>and Times RO suitcases as well.
>
>So, should I be ditching one or more of those? Or if I use fonts from
>the wrong "Times xxx" suitcase in a PDF document, will the results not
>be recognized as "the real Times font" on other machines?
You can use any one you like, so long as you embed the font, which is
generally recommended rather strongly.
Ralf Koenig
>>sure, Ghostscripts finds the PFB's or PFA's for all your used fonts. For
>>this reason Ghostscript comes with a package of the 35 base fonts. Check
>>that it is installed and used.
>
>
> That's where the gotcha is: I don't have the PFBs. I guess one
> solution would be to download the required Type 1 fonts from
> Adobe, and then embed them.
Well, you say:
- you use groff and groff uses metrics (obiously the ones of the true
Adobe Postscript Base35 Fonts, as it prints fine on a printer) So,
where exactly does groff take these metrics from?
- you do not have the corresponding Adobe PFB's
Why don't you use this alternate approach: As you have the afm and pfb
files for the URW fonts that come with ghostscript, why don't you use
these with groff?
Then: groff uses the URW font metrics, and creates the PS file.
Aditionally it should embed the URW fonts into the document (or you
could write an awk script that does this job). Then convert to PDF with
ghostscript and you're done.
The metrics and outlines will fit together because both files came from
the same source (the URW fonts).
>>Eventually, the problem is also with groff (or your use of groff)
>>because you describe the mistakes as random.
>
>
> Random was a poor choice of word. I'm introduciong the
> problem elements in exactly the same way.
You're right, random is the wrong word after you've described more
exactly what you meant the first time.
> Many thanks for you help; any further light that you can
> shed on this will be greatfully received!
>
> In the meantine, I think I'll bite the bullet and see what
> happens when I buy one of the problematic fonts from Adobe.
It will be hard to get the Type1-versions these days (Adobe loves to
sell Opentype versions instead). In addition they are quite expensive,
why not try the URW versions first? From what I know, they are *very*
close to the Adobe ones.
In addition, you said, your system had DisplayPostscript. Shouldn't this
DisplayPostscript software also inlude the Base 35 fonts? Maybe you just
have to locate the AFMs and PFBs on your system, they might even be
ones, that were licensed from Adobe.
As a third option, sometimes the manufacturers of Postscript printers
(Lexmark in your case) put the built-in fonts on a CD/disk which comes
with the printer. So you might already have the fonts somewhere in your
closet.
You may also try using a newer version of ghostscript first, as another
person in this thread has noted.
Rich Teer
> - you use groff and groff uses metrics (obiously the ones of the true
> Adobe Postscript Base35 Fonts, as it prints fine on a printer) So,
> where exactly does groff take these metrics from?
>
> - you do not have the corresponding Adobe PFB's
I do now. I bought them from Adobe last night. :-)
> Then: groff uses the URW font metrics, and creates the PS file.
> Aditionally it should embed the URW fonts into the document (or you
> could write an awk script that does this job). Then convert to PDF with
> ghostscript and you're done.
That is what I was oringinally trying. It seems that the version
of ghostscript I was using (7.07) has known problems wrt spacing
when converting to PDF.
> It will be hard to get the Type1-versions these days (Adobe loves to
> sell Opentype versions instead). In addition they are quite expensive,
> why not try the URW versions first? From what I know, they are *very*
> close to the Adobe ones.
They're close - but not close enough for me. Also, they weren't
as expensice as I thought they'd be. For $100 US, I bought about
35 Type 1 fonts (their "Type Basics"), including all the fonts I
need.
> In addition, you said, your system had DisplayPostscript. Shouldn't this
> DisplayPostscript software also inlude the Base 35 fonts? Maybe you just
It does, but Solaris uses a different format font. :-(
> You may also try using a newer version of ghostscript first, as another
> person in this thread has noted.
I looked briefly at that, but it didn't compile cleanly out
of the box (no configure script). As I don't have time to
mess about figuring this stuff out, I just downloaded the
3--day trial version of Adobe Acrobat Pro. That, together
with the fonts I bought, solved all the problems, so I am a
happy camper! :-)
Thanks to all for their help,
Ralf Koenig
> On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Ralf Koenig wrote:
>
>
>>In addition, you said, your system had DisplayPostscript. Shouldn't this
>>DisplayPostscript software also inlude the Base 35 fonts? Maybe you just
>
>
> It does, but Solaris uses a different format font. :-(
I guess the fonts are in PFA format, aren't they? In this case you could
have converted them with 't1binary' from the t1utils package. But most
Postscript related software can use the PFA's just fine OOTB.
>>You may also try using a newer version of ghostscript first, as another
>>person in this thread has noted.
>
>
> I looked briefly at that, but it didn't compile cleanly out
> of the box (no configure script). As I don't have time to
> mess about figuring this stuff out, I just downloaded the
> 3--day trial version of Adobe Acrobat Pro. That, together
> with the fonts I bought, solved all the problems, so I am a
> happy camper! :-)
That counts as cheating! ;-)
What do you do in a month or two, when you have found all those nasty
typos in your book and you want to recompile it?
As you do have the PFBs now anyway, you might try to get the Solaris
solution running. Just make sure to tell Ghostscript about your new
fonts in a map file.
Rich Teer
> I guess the fonts are in PFA format, aren't they? In this case you could
No, something called F3. :-(
> That counts as cheating! ;-)
:-)
> What do you do in a month or two, when you have found all those nasty
> typos in your book and you want to recompile it?
Well, the MS has been through several rounds of extensive reviewing,
som I'm kinda hoping that typos will be few and far between!
> As you do have the PFBs now anyway, you might try to get the Solaris
> solution running. Just make sure to tell Ghostscript about your new
> fonts in a map file.
Agreed; that's what I intend to do in the not-too-distant future.
Patrick TJ McPhee
Rich Teer <rich...@rite-group.com> wrote:
% > You may also try using a newer version of ghostscript first, as another
% > person in this thread has noted.
%
% I looked briefly at that, but it didn't compile cleanly out
% of the box (no configure script).
I've always found that ghostscript compiles without trouble. The one
catch is that you must use GNU make.
--
Patrick TJ McPhee
East York Canada
pt...@interlog.com