On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, David Kastrup<d...@gnu.org> wrote: > Andrew Hawryluk <ahawry...@gmail.com> writes: > >> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 3:11 AM, David Kastrup<d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> Andrew Hawryluk <ahawry...@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Long ago I noticed that the text in our PDF manuals is fully black, >>>> which results in rough-looking text when printed: >>>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2008-10/msg00059.html >>>> >>>> Attached is a patch which corrects this, and the printed output is >>>> noticeably improved. (The on-screen output is nearly >>>> indistinguishable.) >>>> >>>> I'll send this to the TexInfo folks as well. >>>> >>>> Andrew >>>> From b2608a3c68f677729d5b72379d18b978b8c6236a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>>> From: Andrew Hawryluk <ahawry...@gmail.com> >>>> Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 21:14:42 -0600 >>>> Subject: [PATCH] Fix TexInfo PDF output text color >>>> >>>> Changed CMKY colors to RGB colors, as RGB black prints >>>> better than CMYK black on home printers. >>> >>> In that case, the "home printer" is broken. It might be conceivable to >>> use greyscale black as an alternative, but RGB black appears like a bad >>> choice for printing. >>> >>> Could you specify the details of your "home printer"? >> >> I have had identical results on two monochrome laser printers, using >> both Evince and Acrobat Reader. The home printer is a Samsung ML-2010; >> I don't remember what the work printer is. In either case, they seem >> to compensate for the fact that cmyk (0 0 0 1) is not the darkest tone >> available. Do you get different results in print? > > Sure do. So what driver with what setting converts your PDF to the > respective printer language? > > -- > David Kastrup >
Good question. At home: Samsung ML-2010, SpliX V. 2.0.0 on Ubuntu 9.04 (evince or acroread) At work: not sure, Windows XP and Adobe Acrobat 9.0 (Yes, I have just confessed to having printed a bit of LilyPond documentation at work.) I have also now tried monochrome black with CMYK red, which is probably the best output option, but the TeX code could be cleaned up. I have attached sample pages of the original and my latest variation for comparison. Perhaps someone else can print both pages and see a difference. Thanks, David, for humoring me as I figure this out! Andrew _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
