Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
| From | Jacob McDermott <jpmcd87@gmail.com> |
| To | statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |
| Subject | Re: st: RE: Graph format for publication with Springer |
| Date | Tue, 24 Sep 2013 10:24:02 -0500 |
Indeed. Thank you all for the help. This was very informative. Jacob On 9/24/2013 10:16 AM, Joerg Luedicke wrote:
I would discuss such issues directly with the responsible typesetter. Joerg On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Jacob McDermott <jpmcd87@gmail.com> wrote:Thank you for the response. This book is to be published as both a physical book and an ebook. Are you saying that the ebook version will likely have higher resolution graphs than this proof? Jacob On 9/24/2013 9:49 AM, Robert Picard wrote:While it is true that Encapsulated postscript can be rendered at any resolution, they may also be quite large and slow to render if the original graph contains a large number of objects (e.g. 100K points). The 1200 dpi TIFF should provide plenty of resolution for publication. The downside of TIFFs is that they are quite large (and uncompressed). A 1200dpi file (7200x5236) graph is 150MB. If you have one hundred for a book, the proofs would be 15GB if produced at full resolution. Springer just produced a reduced sized PDF for the proofs (low resolution, probably 72dpi, and compressed for bitmapped graphics) to reduce the file size. The EPSs will look better in the PDF proofs but it is not likely to make a difference once printed because the typesetters will use full-resolution TIFFs. Robert On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:10 AM, <k.gemenis@utwente.nl> wrote:Jacob, Vector formats such as .eps (or .pdf) should be preferred over raster images such as .tiff or .jpg. Vector images do not pixelate when they are enlarged as raster images do. Just send your .eps graphs to Springer and you will notice the difference. The reason why .tiff images look better in word is because word cannot handle (the otherwise preferable) vector images. Best, Kostas ________________________________________ From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] on behalf of Jacob McDermott [jpmcd87@gmail.com] Sent: 24 September 2013 15:58 To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject: st: Graph format for publication with Springer Hello, The professor I work for has a book to be published with Springer. We recently received the proofs from Springer as a .pdf, and I notice that all of the graphs look fuzzy and compressed. I sent them 1200 dps .tif files to use, but I also have the graphs saved as .wmf, .eps, .gph. Springer indicates on their website that they accept either .eps or 1200 dps .tifs -- The only reason we went with .tifs is that they appeared much clearer in word. Although I understand that .eps image pasted in word are just compressed "previews" and that the actual printed copy is higher quality, we opted for .tifs as we were doing most of our work electronically, and it was much easier to view the .tif graphs than the .eps. The graphs are a mixture of bar graphs, scatter plots, and line plots -- If I insert graphs using each format into word and save as a .pdf, I notice that the text on .eps, and .wmf looks very clear, but the lines on line graphs reproduce strangely -- i.e. for line graphs, any horizontal line segment has a larger width than any other part of the line, sharp changes in slope lead to disconnected lines, etc. On the other hand, the .tifs look good and are much clearer in the version I created vs the version sent to us by Springer. Have any of you had experience with Springer, or have any general tips as to how we can get graphs that appear more clearly? Is it just a matter of sending them the graphs as .eps? Is there additional information you need to answer my question? Below is a link the Springer's comments on figures and illustrations: http://www.springer.com/authors/book+authors?SGWID=0-154102-12-970210-0 Thanks for the help, Jacob * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/ * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/ * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/* * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/ * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/* * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/ * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/* * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/ * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
* * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/ * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/