Re: Rendering differences between PDF viewers

[luigi scarso <luigi.scarso@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl> wrote:
> I use acrobat (prof) as reference viewer from the editor and okular (kde
> windows version) on a second screen as handy constantly open one; I tried a
> few more but stuck to these two.
For MFLua I need to show 2 pages with thousand of MP points and  look
on how the curves of the glyph join together.
With ctrl-r and magnification of 6400% AdobeReader is the only one
that is able to show the pdf without need to take an italian coffe at
every refresh.
When I need to typeset black&white  or not-critical-colors document,
emacs+xpdf+ two_rows_of_workspace_in_gnome is ok --- no need another
monitor: the bottom row has the editor, the top rows has the viewer.
Maybe a wide 16:9 screen and the latest Emacs (which can render a pdf
into a buffer) are also ok: just split an emacs windows vertically in
two, left side is the editor, right side the viewer.  I use the shell
buffer, so another split is needed.
Moving between buffers is not agile but the advantage is to minimize
the use of the mouse.
Anyway  with a laptop it's not a problem to have another monitor, and
I use this configuration if I'm under Windows,especially with the
sumatra pdf or the ReaderX.

For all the rest (critical colors, interactive features, flash into
pdf..) the latest AcrobatProfessional is a must.



-- 
luigi
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________