gEDA gschem: "Write image" resolution

[Joerg]

Hello,

Just kicked the tires on gschem, to see if I should switch. Since it
doesn't look like there will ever be a Windows version I am running it
in VirtualBox on an XP machine. Looks pretty good so far. Anyhow, a
question:

People like me must include schematic excerpts in documents a lot. When
I use the "Write image" export utility it does produce a file I could
then import but the resolution isn't adequate for a decent quality
document. At large width and height settings it's actually so chopped up
that parts values cannot be deciphered anymore. In Eagle I could set a
resolution instead of width and height and when set to 300 that produces
a pristine PNG image.

Is that possible in gschem somehow? Or if not are there any plans to
improve the "Write image" routine? Alternatively, is there a trick to
store the whole sheet in a somewhat popular format (preferably not PDF,
PS or EPS) and then use another graphics program to pick out the wanted
piece?

 

[Heinz Schmitz]

People like me must include schematic excerpts in documents a lot. When
I use the "Write image" export utility it does produce a file I could
then import but the resolution isn't adequate for a decent quality
document.

http://www.geda.seul.org/tools/gschem/#gschem
says, that

# Postscript printing of the schematic is supported
# PNG image writing of the schematic is supported

I would try to create a .PS or .PNG-file, import it into IrfanView
and save it from there in a format I could work on with.

Regards,
H.

 

[Joerg]

http://www.geda.seul.org/tools/gschem/#gschem
says, that

# Postscript printing of the schematic is supported
# PNG image writing of the schematic is supported

I would try to create a .PS or .PNG-file, import it into IrfanView
and save it from there in a format I could work on with.

Well, that's what I tried, image writing to PNG. The result was rather
ugly and at some write sizes plain not readable. EPS was refused by
IrfanView with something like "file contains errors".

 

[DJ Delorie]

Well, that's what I tried, image writing to PNG. The result was
rather ugly and at some write sizes plain not readable. EPS was
refused by IrfanView with something like "file contains errors".

A quick check of their website leads to this question... Do you have
ghostscript installed? IrfanView "supports" eps by having ghostscript
convert it to a raster, which will make it ugly again.

What I recommend is exporting EPS and converting it to PDF, then use
acroread to view/print it.

Or I use ghostscript convert the EPS to an anti-aliased PNG, which
results in better quality than gschem's default PNG exporter.

 

[Joerg]

A quick check of their website leads to this question... Do you have
ghostscript installed? IrfanView "supports" eps by having ghostscript
convert it to a raster, which will make it ugly again.

I think it's GSView what I'd really need.

What I recommend is exporting EPS and converting it to PDF, then use
acroread to view/print it.

Well, I don't need to read/print but folks like me must often include
snippets and complete pages of schematics in Word documents, usually as
figures with captions. Mostly to explain circuitry to folks who won't
understand it by just looking at the schematic.

Or I use ghostscript convert the EPS to an anti-aliased PNG, which
results in better quality than gschem's default PNG exporter.

Some friends in a German NG convinced me to give Linux a shot and
coached me a bit through the maze of VirtualBox and Ubuntu, then gschem.
So I poked around a bit after evince didn't work and, tada, found that
Gimp (which comes with the distro as default) does the job nicely. So
it'll go like this:

gschem write image to EPS format. EPS into Gimp (takes a while), set to
300dpi, cut unwanted areas, store as PNG file. Import PNG file into Word
document. A bit cumbersome but that produces an acceptable quality,
quite comparable to Eagle schematic exports

I don't know squat about programming but if you guys ever think of
improving this export feature maybe a lot of the work can be reduced by
using code parts from Gimp so that gschem can do a straight write as a
300dpi (or even selectable resolution) PNG file.

 

[JeffM]

Just kicked the tires on gschem, to see if I should switch.
Since it doesn't look like there will ever be a Windows version...

(At points in the past) I have seen evidence
that there were at least 2 "Windoze versions" of the suite.
http://www.google.com/search?q=gEDA+win32.build+OR+win32.port+site:seul.org+-rendering&num=100
(As mentioned in previous threads, the result is a lot of grousing
and bug reports on things that are user errors.)

There _are_ currently Windows versions out there running.
What there _isn't_ is a "Windoze installer".
Each Windoze user has to *compile* executables for himself.
As that weeds out a lot of the folks who have low software skills,
it minimizes the occurances of Clueless Windoze User Syndrome.

...I am running it in VirtualBox on an XP machine.

As the elements of the gEDA suite are written as Unix apps,
there will always need to be
an intermediate layer at *some* point in the process
--even if what you want to end up with
are **native** Windoze-compatible executables.
http://www.google.com/search?q=build.gEDA+Cygwin+-have-not&filter=0&num=100

So, how is the speed with your level of horsepower?

 

[Joerg]

(At points in the past) I have seen evidence
that there were at least 2 "Windoze versions" of the suite.
http://www.google.com/search?q=gEDA+win32.build+OR+win32.port+site:seul.org+-rendering&num=100
(As mentioned in previous threads, the result is a lot of grousing
and bug reports on things that are user errors.)

There _are_ currently Windows versions out there running.
What there _isn't_ is a "Windoze installer".
Each Windoze user has to *compile* executables for himself.
As that weeds out a lot of the folks who have low software skills,
it minimizes the occurances of Clueless Windoze User Syndrome.

That pretty much excludes me as well. I am most certainly not a
programmer but know CAD quite well.

As the elements of the gEDA suite are written as Unix apps,
there will always need to be
an intermediate layer at *some* point in the process
--even if what you want to end up with
are **native** Windoze-compatible executables.
http://www.google.com/search?q=build.gEDA+Cygwin+-have-not&filter=0&num=100

So, how is the speed with your level of horsepower?

Well, it's so so. It's ok but not quite as snappy as Cadsoft Eagle. But
Eagle doesn't have a hierarchical sheet structures so what can ya do?

Right now Ubuntu forgets the links to the LAN server every time I power
it down. Hopefully I'll figure that out one of these days but it's only
a minute to re-install that in the morning.