MathGroup Archive 2010

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Re: Mathematica and LaTeX

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg108081] Re: [mg108032] Re: Mathematica and LaTeX
  • From: Murray Eisenberg <murray at math.umass.edu>
  • Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 06:11:14 -0500 (EST)
  • Organization: Mathematics & Statistics, Univ. of Mass./Amherst
  • References: <201003041027.FAA26613@smc.vnet.net> <hmqivo$shc$1@smc.vnet.net> <201003070901.EAA00140@smc.vnet.net>
  • Reply-to: murray at math.umass.edu

I never systematically checked the size comparison of exported .eps vs. 
.pdf.  But I seem to recall that it is not unusual to have .eps larger.

On 3/7/2010 4:01 AM, AES wrote:
> In article<hmqivo$shc$1 at smc.vnet.net>,
>   Murray Eisenberg<murray at math.umass.edu>  wrote:
>
>> That's a common problem that is easily solved in either of two ways:
>>
>> (1) Process the LaTeX file with pdfTeX so as to directly convert from
>> .tex source to .pdf output. This should avoid the bounding box problem.
>>
>> (2) Instead of doing the Mathematica Export to .pdf, Export to .eps.
>> Next, run an ordinary LaTeX processor that produces .dvi output.
>> Finally, convert from .dvi to .ps and then from .ps to .eps.
>>
>> I do (2) all the time, since I get the quickest workflow that way. But I
>> use (1) sometimes, too.
>
> Do your exported .eps files typically end up being much larger than the
> corresponding .pdf files?
>

-- 
Murray Eisenberg                     murray at math.umass.edu
Mathematics & Statistics Dept.
Lederle Graduate Research Tower      phone 413 549-1020 (H)
University of Massachusetts                413 545-2859 (W)
710 North Pleasant Street            fax   413 545-1801
Amherst, MA 01003-9305


  • Prev by Date: Re: Putting a Plot inside a Graphics function with other drawings
  • Next by Date: Re: Transition to Wolfram Workbench
  • Previous by thread: Re: Mathematica and LaTeX
  • Next by thread: Re: Mathematica and LaTeX