Re: Importing Lilypond output

[Mats Bengtsson]

> > This is a problem with all TeX generated postscript files.
> > Once, I made a large poster using LaTeX and wanted to 
> > import the Postscript file into Adobe Illustrator since 
> > that's the tool used at the print shop. It failed completely,
> > even though Adobe invented Postscript and presumably should
> > know how to interpret the language.
> 
> So what should I conclude: that TeX produces nonstandard postscript code
> or that Adobe does not implement its own standards properly? Your phrasing
> suggests the latter is the case, but how do I know (I am not an expert, I
> am just asking)? All unix tools do know how to handle TeX output but that
> does not convince me since I also understand that with many Microsoft
> products you can use and produce HTML code quite different from the W3C
> standards; and in that case `we' (unix users) blame MS. Maybe a dangerous
> analogy. 

The diplomatic answer is probably that the PS standard (as 
every standard) leaves some details unspecified and that they 
are interpreted differently by Adobe, by the dvips people and
by the ghostscript people.


address@hidden said:
>       Hmm...some time ago I had to add a few corrections to some
> lilypond-generated postscript pages. I did that with Illustrator very
> well, except for the speed - loading a page would take a very long
> time since there were awfully many different graphical objects on it.
>       I did not try with the recent versions of lilypond but it would be a
> pity if one could not do that any more. Lily by itself (nor any other
> similar program) will never be able to answer *all* the notation
> needs. 

Great! I've actually never tried Lilypond output with 
Adobe Illustrator. (The example I mentioned above was
a poster in A0 format that used pstricks quite heavily.)

     /Mats