|
[Sponsors] |
September 3, 2008, 15:24 |
Buggy postscript output from CFX
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
It is incredible, after reaching version 11 of their excellent postprocessing tool cfxpost that the postscript printing is still so buggy and produces so big files. The most incredible thing is that sometimes it hangs up while writing a file and the file dimensions continue to grow while in reality no new info are added. Also for successfully written postscript file really no attempt to optimize is made. Creating an image of a 10 level contour or a 200 level contour gives you the same file dimension. Each triangle of the surface on which the contour is plotted is written in the output file by itself instead of generating a polygon enclosing triangles having the same level and filling all by postscript command. The postscript printing part seems written by an elementary school guy instead from a professional programmer. Is there any flag or hidden capability by means of which a more clever behavior can be triggered on? It is not possible that this is the best we can have from those guys. From any other point of view the post processor is a really great tool.
|
|
September 3, 2008, 16:32 |
Re: Buggy postscript output from CFX
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Use PNG instead and pick an appropriate resolution.
|
|
September 3, 2008, 16:37 |
Re: Buggy postscript output from CFX
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Well, this is a workaround not a solution. PNG is a raster image format while postscript is vector one. If you want vector the raster one is a simple workaround and not a solution.
As a matter of fact png is quite good as a raster format but still raster. |
|
September 5, 2008, 02:49 |
Re: Buggy postscript output from CFX
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi,
I am not 100% sure of this but I think you will find the postscript output is still rasterised in CFX-Post. I don't think it draws vector objects. (Correct me if I am wrong!) Glenn Horrocks |
|
September 5, 2008, 09:49 |
Re: Buggy postscript output from CFX
|
#5 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
As far as I can see editing the file itself it is vector. Here is the command definition art the very beginning of the file and one of the line where the filled triangle is drawn.
/t {moveto lineto lineto closepath fill} def ..... 62.50 13.24 61.79 11.50 62.50 12.05 t There is indeed one strange thing. Triangles drawn are divided in a regular grid. I suppose this is for the hidded face removal algorithm. |
|
September 7, 2008, 20:47 |
Re: Buggy postscript output from CFX
|
#6 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi,
Sorry I don't speak postscript so I have no idea what the text you included means. I would test it by using an postscript imaging software like ghostscript or whatever and zooming in to see whether it is pixels or vector objects. Glenn Horrocks |
|
September 9, 2008, 10:31 |
Re: Buggy postscript output from CFX
|
#7 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
The postscript output is indeed a vector image. The main advantage of postscript is that you can scale the image to any resolution and it will still draw perfectly. However, as mcirri has pointed out, the postscript output is not optimized to reduce the number of faces; you will get a triangle for every face in the mesh.
That said, PNG does have some advantages. If you know the resolution needed, you can input the pixel height and width directly. In the end, regardless of whether you have a raster or postscript image, it is turned into pixels. If the image is the right resolution, you won't see the difference. The advantage to using the PNG output is that it will generally be smaller (albeit because post isn't doing the perfect treatment of the postscript output) and post can also anti-alias the image when it is generated, giving you a smoother image than you would get with post-script anyhow (well, depending on what software you use with the post-script image). -CycLone |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Importing solutions in CFX. | Alphonso | CFX | 1 | August 1, 2008 15:01 |
CFX 10's solutions differ from CFX 5.7's | Atit Koonsrisuk | CFX | 4 | July 26, 2006 12:59 |
Does CFX can output ".rth" file? | prayskyer | CFX | 6 | July 7, 2006 21:08 |
is "double precesion output for cfx" default? | charles | CFX | 3 | May 17, 2006 15:40 |
CFX 4.4 installation problem | Pandu Sattvika | CFX | 1 | December 1, 2001 05:07 |