[R] PowerPoint - eps not suitable

[Jan T. Kim]

On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 01:43:54PM -0500, Marc Schwartz (via MN) wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 14:02 -0400, Michael H. Prager wrote:
> > Previous posters have argued for EPS files as a desirable transfer 
> > format for quality reasons.  This is of course true when the output is 
> > through a Postscript device.
> > 
> > However, the original poster is making presentations with PowerPoint.  
> > Those essentially are projected from the screen -- and screens of 
> > Windows PCs are NOT Postscript devices.  The version of PowerPoint I 
> > have will display a bitmapped, low-resolution preview when EPS is 
> > imported, and that is what will be projected.  It is passable, but much 
> > better can be done!
> > 
> > In this application, I have had best results using cut and paste or the 
> > Windows metafile format, both of which (as others have said) give 
> > scalable vector graphics.  When quirks of Windows metafile arise (as 
> > they can do, especially when fonts differ between PCs), I have had good 
> > results with PNG for line art and JPG for other art.
> > 
> > Mike
> 
> Just so that it is covered (though this has been noted in other
> threads), even in this situation, one can still use EPS files embedded
> in PowerPoint (or Impress) presentations.

Just to cover yet another possible route, I've in the past used ghostscript
to produce high resolution (or, more generally, whatever resolution was
required) raster images from PostScript by something like

    gs -r150x150 -sDEVICE=bmp256 -sOutputFile=x.bmp -dNOPAUSE myfile.ps -c quit

Apologies if this has been mentioned in this thread already.

Best regards, Jan
-- 
 +- Jan T. Kim -------------------------------------------------------+
 |             email: jtk at cmp.uea.ac.uk                               |
 |             WWW:   http://www.cmp.uea.ac.uk/people/jtk             |
 *-----=<  hierarchical systems are for files, not for humans  >=-----*