Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site uw-beaver
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!laser-lovers
From: laser-lovers@uw-beaver
Newsgroups: fa.laser-lovers
Subject: Re: PostScript printers vs. ImPress printers
Message-ID: <629@uw-beaver>
Date: Wed, 30-Jan-85 00:33:52 EST
Article-I.D.: uw-beave.629
Posted: Wed Jan 30 00:33:52 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 30-Jan-85 08:13:40 EST
Sender: daemon@uw-beaver
Organization: U of Washington Computer Science
Lines: 20

From: ihnp4!utzoo!henry@uw-beaver.arpa

> It may or may not be impossible, but the PostScript printers do it and
> do it well...
>
> ...fonts are indeed represented as size-independent outlines and... they
> can be artitrarily scaled and rotated before being scan-converted and
> ... the scan-conversion works just fine in point sizes down to 4 on a
> 300dpi printer.

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."  The more experienced typesetting
people at the Typesetting BOF at Usenix Dallas said that the scan conversion
does *not* work "just fine", and that the loss in quality (compared to
fonts with separate masters for each size and orientation) *is* visible
in output from the Apple printer.  Quite probably it's still impressive
(I haven't seen it yet), but Adobe not has found a magic way around the
problems of size-independent description.

				Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
				{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry