I use a style file that specifies page margins. I cannot understand the style file, but I guess it specifies bottom margins by using commands such as \vspace, \vskip, \vfil.
When I compile the tex document with pdflatex the margins, especially the bottom ones, change. When I compile the document first to ps then to pdf, the margins are good.
Do you have any idea, what the reason might be?
The contents of the style file can be accessed from http://tinypaste.com/c53d1
Probably because something is defaulting to a page size of 'Letter' and the other path is defaulting to a page size of 'A4' (or vice-versa). You might see if the \documentclass directive in your document allows you to specify page size. If you're using ps2pdf you may also have to specify the output page size. Also, don't forget to specify the destination device (-P IIRC) when using dvips so it renders computer modern fonts correctly in the PDF.
My teacher uses this structure:
% Nadefinujeme stranu A5
%
\setlength{\paperwidth}{148mm}
\setlength{\paperheight}{210mm}
% Pro PDFTeX potrebujeme navic definovat \pdfpagewidth
% a \pdfpageheight. Standardni TeX ale tyto registry nezna,
% nemuzeme do nich tedy hned prirazovat. Proto se nejprve
% trikem zeptame, jestli se preklada pomoci PDFTeXu
\ifx\pdfoutput\undefined
\else% Zda se, ze \pdfoutput je definovany, tj. pouziva se PDFTeX
\setlength{\pdfpagewidth}{\paperwidth}
\setlength{\pdfpageheight}{\paperheight}
\fi
%
In the comments there are:
A5 page definition:
For PDFTeX we also need to define \pdfpaperwidth and \pdfpaerheight. But standard TeX doesn't know those registers so we cannot assign them. Thats why we use a trick to ask whther PDFTeX is used.
It seems \pdfoutput is defined so PDFTeX is used.
I hope it should help you with solving the problem.
Try setting the page size by running texconfig. This sounds like a letter <-> a4 conversion problem to me. (This has annoyed me several times in the past!)
I guess it specifies bottom margins by using commands such as \vspace, \vskip, \vfil.
Nope, this is the part that specifies the page design:
\oddsidemargin9.6mm
\evensidemargin9.6mm
\topmargin-7.mm
\headheight20pt
\textwidth155mm
\textheight242mm
\parindent1cm
I think your problem is the page size switching between a4 and letter when you go between LaTeX and pdfLaTeX, although that might seem strange. You should find that loading the geometry package before fbe_tez helps. E.g.,
\usepackage{geometry,fbe_tex}
Geometry sets the physical paper size, which is a relatively modern (cf. setting up the page layout as that style does) feature.
Related
I am interested in highlighting portions of a PDF programmatically, hopefully through a command line tool of sorts. My particular PDF file is not OCRed so the text is not searchable, but the particular places that I would like to highlight occur on every page in the same position. I was wondering if there is a tool to do this where I can input the rectangle positions in pixels into the command line tool and it would highlight the relevant portions for me.
Previous Findings
I have looked over the internet and found a few sites noting how to do this by searching for the text. Unfortunately that is not possible for me as my PDF does not have OCR.
I have searched stackexchange for similar questions and found
How to Highlight Text in PDF with commandline (windows)? and https://stackoverflow.com/questions/32713633/how-to-highlight-text-in-pdf-using-acrobat-reader-from-command-line but both were unanswered.
Potential Ideas
The first link had a possible lead with a given link to
Add comments to PDF files automagically with regular expressions
which uses ghostscript to include annotations. Is it possible to use ghostscript to highlight the pages in a similar fashion by coordinates.
The second link mentioned using command line options for the adobe acrobat/reader exe file, but searching the relevant manual for the command line switches does not show any highlighting options. It may be possible that Adobe does not support the highlight option through command line anymore, which would be unfortunate.
My last idea would be using AutoHotkey to create a macro that does an actual highlight for me using a GUI program, but that would be the last resort.
What do you all think? Any ideas on what to do, or things to check out? I am willing to program out a solution and can work out the solution on Windows or Linux if necessary. Thanks in advance.
I would have thought a Highlight annotation was what you wanted.Highlight annotations are a type of text markup annotation and as such take a set of QuadPoints which describe the bounding box(es) to apply the annotation type to.
Since you say you know the co-ordinates this would seem appropriate for your use. Of course, you will have to create the Annotation on every page, and you will have to learn how to program this with a pdfmark, but I believe it should work.
Note that the co-ordinates are in user space (generally 72 points to the inch) NOT pixels, because PDF is not an image format there is no concept of pixels, except for included images.
There are quite a few officially unsupported command line parameters to acrobat or the acrobat reader (acrord32.exe in Windows).
See: https://www.adobe.com/content/dam/acom/en/devnet/acrobat/pdfs/pdf_open_parameters.pdf
This includes a parameter to highlight with four integers at left,right,top,bottom that are in some unspecified units but with 0,0 at the top left of the page.
EXCEPT... I have been unable to get this to work.
I can pass in parameters to search and zoom but highlight never shows anything.
For instance:
start acrord32 /n /s /a "search=MS25441&zoom=300&page=1&highlight=0,55,0,65" floorplan1_ABM_cameras.pdf
Opens the files, searches for the string, zooms to 300% but nothing shows for a highlight no matter what coordinates I specify.
In linux, I use ps2pdf to convert text file report to pdf in bash script.
To feed ps2pdf for ps file, I use paps command because of UTF8 encoding.
The problem is pdf file from ps2pdf is about 30 times bigger than ps file created from paps.
Previous, I used a2ps to convert text to ps and then fed to ps2pdf, and the pdf output from this is normal size and not big.
Is there any way to reduce the pdf size from paps and ps2pdf? Or what am I doing wrong?
The command I used is as below.
paps --landscape --font="Freemono 10" textfile.txt > textfile.ps
ps2pdf textfile.ps textfile.pdf
Thank you very much.
As the author of paps, I agree with #Kens's description of paps' inner workings. Indeed, I chose to create my own font mechanism in the postscript language. That is history though as I have just released a new version of paps that uses cairo for its postscript, pdf, or svg rendering. This is much more compact than paps output, especially w.r.t. the result after doing ps2pdf. Please check out http://github.com/dov/paps .
For ps2pdf, it is easiest to control output size is by designating paper size.
An example command is:
ps2pdf -sPAPERSIZE=a4 -dOptimize=true -dEmbedAllFonts=true YourPSFile.ps
ps2pdf is the wrapper to ghostscript (ps2pdf is owned by ghostscript package)
with -sPAPERSIZE=something you define the paper size. Wondering about valid PAPERSIZE values? See [http://ghostscript.com/doc/current/Use.htm#Known_paper_sizes here]
-dOptimize=true let's the created PDF be optimised for loading
-dEmbedAllFonts=true makes the fonts look always nice
All of this is from : https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Ps2pdf
I think he means the size on disk, rather than the size of the output media. The 'most likely' scenario normally is that the source contains a large DCT encoded image (JPEG) which is decoded and then compressed losslessly into the PDF file using something like flate.
But that can't be the case here, as its apparently only text. So the next most likely problem is that the text is being rasterised, which suggests some odd fonts in the PostScript, which is possible if you are using UTF-8 text, its probably constructing something daft like a CIDFont with TrueType descendant fonts.
However, since the version of Ghostscript isn't given, and we don't have a file to look at, its really impossible to tell. Older versions of the pdfwrite device did less well on creating optimal files, especially from CIDFonts.
Setting 'Optimize=true' won't actually do anything with the current version of pdfwrite, that's an Acrobat Distiller parameter we no longer implement. Older versions of Ghostscript did use it, but the output wasn't correctly Linearised.
The correct parameter for newer versions is '-dFastWebView' which is supposed to be faster when loading from the web if the client can deal with this format. Given the crazy way its specified, practically no viewer in the world does. However, the file is properly constructed in recent versions, so if you can find a viewer which supports it, you can use this (at the expense of making the PDF file slightly larger)
If you would like to post a URL to a PostScript file exhibiting problems I can look at it, but without it there's really nothing much I can say.
Update
The problem is the paps file, it doesn't actually contain any text at all, in a PostScript sense.
Each character is stored as a procedure, where a path is drawn and then filled. This is NOT stored in a font, just in a dictionary. All the content on the page is stored in strings in a paps 'language'. In the case of text this simply calls the procedure for the relevant glyph(s)
Now, because this isn't a font, the repeated procedures are simply seen by pdfwrite (and pretty much all other PostScript consumers) as a series of paths and fills, and that's exactly what gets written to the output in the PDF file.
Now normally a PDF file would contain text that looks like :
/Helvetica 20 Tf
(AAA) Tj
which is pretty compact, the font would contain the program to draw the 'A' so we only include it once.
The output from paps for the same text would look like (highly truncated) :
418.98 7993.7 m
418.98 7981.84 l
415.406 7984.14 411.82 7985.88 408.219 7987.04 c
...
... 26 lines omitted
...
410.988 7996.3 414.887 7995.19 418.98 7993.7 c
f
418.98 7993.7 m
418.98 7981.84 l
415.406 7984.14 411.82 7985.88 408.219 7987.04 c
...
... 26 lines omitted
...
410.988 7996.3 414.887 7995.19 418.98 7993.7 c
f
418.98 7993.7 m
418.98 7981.84 l
415.406 7984.14 411.82 7985.88 408.219 7987.04 c
...
... 26 lines omitted
...
410.988 7996.3 414.887 7995.19 418.98 7993.7 c
f
which as you can clearly see is much larger. Whereas with a font we would only include the instructions to draw the glyph once, and then use only a few bytes to draw each occurrence, with the paps output we include the drawing instructions for the glyph each and every time it is drawn.
So the problem is the way paps emits PostScript, and there is nothing that pdfwrite can do about it.
That said, I see that you are using Ghostscript 8.71 which is now 4 years old, you should probably consider upgrading.
I'm using the LaTeX-Beamer class for making presentations. Every once in a while I need to include screenshots. Those graphics are pixel-based, of course. I use includegraphics like this:
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width= \paperwidth]{img/analyzer.png}
\end{figure}
or usually something like this:
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width= 0.8\linewidth]{img/analyzer.png}
\end{figure}
This leads to pretty bad readibility of the contained text, so I'm asking for your best practices: How would you include screenshots containing text considering, that I will do the output PDF with pdflatex?
EDIT: I suppose I'm looking for something like an 1:1 presetation of the image within beamer. However, [scale = 1.0] doesn't achieve what I'm looking for.
Your best bet is to scale the image outside of Latex for inclusion, and include it in 1:1 ratio. The scaling done by graphics packages in Latex isn't going to be anywhere near as good as possible from other tools. Latex (Tex) has limited floating-point arithmetic capabilities, whereas an external tool can use sophisticated algorithms to get the scaling better.
Another option is to use only a part of the screenshot, the one you want to concentrate on.
Edit: If you can change the font size before taking the screenshot, that's another option—just increase the font size for the screenshots.
Of course, you can combine the two methods.
I have done exactly what you do and e.g defined
\newcommand{\screenshot}[1]{\centerline{%
\includegraphics[height=7.8cm,transparent]{#1}}} % 7.8in
which worked with whatever style I was using at the time. The files included with this macro were all PNGs created with one the usual Linux screen capture tools.
Edit: You may have to play with the size (height and width) of your input files. It came out rather nice for me (and this was from a presentation in 2006).
How about scaling it as follows:
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{images/myimage.jpg}
This works for me.
Have you tried to convert the image to .eps or .pdf file and use this file in LaTeX?
Maybe try also latex, dvips and ps2pdf.
Problem might be in used viewer, in Linux I use Document viewer or ePDFViewer and output is much worse than in Adobe Reader or Acrobat, which I use in Windows...
I'm a newbie to both R and LaTeX and have just recently found how to plot a standard time series graph using R and save it as a png image. What I'm worried about is that saving it as an image and then embedding it into LaTeX is going to scale it and make it look ugly.
Is there a way to make R's plot() function output a vector graphic and embed that into LaTeX? I'm a total beginner in both so please be gentle :) Code snippets are highly appreciated!
I would recommend the tikzDevice package for producing output for inclusion in LaTeX documents:
http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/tikzDevice/index.html
The tikzDevice converts graphics produced in R to code that can be interpreted by the LaTeX package tikz. TikZ provides a very nice vector drawing system for LaTeX. Some good examples of TikZ output are located at:
http://www.texample.net/
The tikzDevice may be used like any other R graphics device:
require( tikzDevice )
tikz( 'myPlot.tex' )
plot( 1, 1, main = '\\LaTex\\ is $\\int e^{xy}$' )
dev.off()
Note that the backslashes in LaTeX macros must be doubled as R interprets a single backslash as an escape character. To use the plot in a LaTeX document, simply include it:
\include{path/to/myPlot.tex}
The pgfSweave package contains Sweave functionality that can handle the above step for you. Make sure that your document contains \usepackage{tikz} somewhere in the LaTeX preamble.
http://cran.r-project.org/
The advantages of tikz() function as compared to pdf() are:
The font of labels and captions in your figures always matches the font used in your LaTeX document. This provides a unified look to your document.
You have all the power of the LaTeX typesetter available for creating mathematical annotation and can use arbitrary LaTeX code in your figure text.
Disadvantages of the tikz() function are:
It does not scale well to handle plots with lots of components. These are things such as persp() plots of large matricies. The shear number of graphic elements can cause LaTeX to slow to a crawl or run out of memory.
The package is currently flagged as beta. This means that the interface or functionality of the package is subject to change if the authors find a compelling reason to do so.
I should end this post by disclaiming that I am an author of both the tikzDevice and pgfSweave packages so my opinion may be biased. However, I have used both packages to produce several academic reports in the last year and have been very satisfied with the results.
Shane is spot-on, you do want Sweave. Eventually.
As a newbie, you may better off separating task though. For that, do this:
open a device: pdf("figures/myfile.pdf", height=6, width=6).
plot your R object: plot(1:10, type='l', main='boring') -- and remember that lattice and ggplot need an explicit print around plot.
important: close your device: dev.off() to finalize the file.
optional: inspect the pdf file.
in LaTeX, use usepackage{graphicx} in the document header, use
\includegraphics[width=0.98\textwidth]{figures/myfile} to include the figure created earlier and note that file extension is optional.
run this through pdflatex and enjoy.
You might want to consider using Sweave. There is a lot of great documentation available for this on the Sweave website (and elsewhere). It has very simple syntax: just put your R code between <<>>= and #.
Here's a simple example that ends up looking like this:
\documentclass[a4paper]{article}
\title{Sweave Example 1}
\author{Friedrich Leisch}
\begin{document}
\maketitle
In this example we embed parts of the examples from the
\texttt{kruskal.test} help page into a \LaTeX{} document:
<<>>=
data(airquality)
library(ctest)
kruskal.test(Ozone ~ Month, data = airquality)
#
which shows that the location parameter of the Ozone
distribution varies significantly from month to month. Finally we
include a boxplot of the data:
\begin{center}
<<fig=TRUE,echo=FALSE>>=
boxplot(Ozone ~ Month, data = airquality)
#
\end{center}
\end{document}
To build the document, you can just call R CMD Sweave file.Rnw or run Sweave(file) from within R.
This is a dupe of a question on SO that I can't find.
But:
http://r-forge.r-project.org/projects/tikzdevice/ -- tikz output from r
and
http://www.rforge.net/pgfSweave/ tikz code via sweave.
Using tikz will give you a look consistent with the rest of your document, plus it will use latex to typeset all the text in your graphs.
EDIT
Getting LaTeX into R Plots
Sometimes I work with a file that contains source code, columns, plain text, sometimes all 3. It looks great on the screen. However, when I send it to a printer, it comes out a mess: columns/tables are misalignment, code looks like a spaghetti, etc.
I use Vim (7.2). How do I reformat the file to please the printer?
Perhaps I should shorten the length of a line?
How do you send it to printer? Try :hardcopy command.
You can also lookup printing-related options printfont, printdevice, printoptions, etc.
See also printoptions and others on vimdoc.sourceforge.net
It's not a pure-Vim solution, but I've had good experiences with GNU a2ps for converting (relatively) poorly formatted text documents (a couple Project Gutenberg titles, to be specific) to a nice, printable pdf/postscript file.
If you aren't worried about having to have a one-step process with no intermediary between Vim and the printer, here is a fairly flexible strategy.
If you have a dark background in Vim with light foreground but would like to print black-on-white since white-on-black is great for terminals but not so great for printed media, try colorscheme shine. (Another nice colorscheme for this is Hemisu, which is superior to Shine for printing diffs.)
Use :TOhtml to convert the document to HTML.
Save the file and open it in your browser.
Open print preview from your browser and set up the window appropriately.
For example, I just printed a nearly 200 column file brought in from Vim this way, and it worked out fine (both in the sense of "well" and in the sense of "small print" :) because I was able to use Firefox's print preview to set the file to print in landscape mode.
Print the file from your browser.
I agree there is a problem. yim has 'formatoptions' to 'wrap' lines together the way you want and break lines at appropriate places ('linebreak', 'breakat') which would give you an elementary wysiwyg word-processing capability, except that it only works on the display and has no effect when sent off to print.