[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[New search]
To: "Acton, Cheryl" <Cheryl.Acton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: PostScript/PCL
From: Dov Isaacs <isaacs@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 11:47:20 -0800
Cc: "'framers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <framers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'framers@xxxxxxxxx'" <framers@xxxxxxxxx>
In-Reply-To: <2FA4D1165F35D211BF8200805FC184040293B3@mtvex02.mtv.gtegsc.com>
Sender: owner-framers@xxxxxxxxx
At 11/19/98 10:53 AM , Acton, Cheryl wrote: >With all the information on the list about FrameMaker and >printer drivers/font technology/PostScript/TrueType/production/Acrobat/ATM >etc., I realize there is a lot to learn. Well, I was talking with our system >administrator about using the new AdobePS 5.0.1 printer driver for some >networked printers and he said incidentally, we'd probably be getting away >from using PostScript and instead we would be using HP's PCL. Would anyone >clue me in on the implications of this? Is this something I should present a >case against? We use networked HP printers from Unix and NT 4. > >------ >Cheryl The simplest implications are as follows: (1) Printing directly -- if you have ANY .EPS artwork or images in your documents, you may end up with either TIFF previews or empty boxes if you print to non-PostScript printers. Line layout with either TrueType or Type 1 typefaces may also differ significantly from that which you would get with PostScript printers or printing to the Acrobat Distiller. (2) PDF -- You can "combat" (1) above by printing from PDF files that you create via the Distiller. The only 'gotcha is that printing of complex PDF-based documents to PCL and other non-PostScript printers is often slower and of lower overall quality than when printing to PostScript printers. - Dov ** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com ** ** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body. **