> > May I recommend 'gv' instead? Same great ghostscript interpreter, > > much better AI.
Thanks, gv is much better, but the characters are still in low resolution. What could be the problem? thanks again --ejg:wq!
> > May I recommend 'gv' instead? Same great ghostscript interpreter, > > much better AI.
Thanks, gv is much better, but the characters are still in low resolution. What could be the problem? thanks again --ejg:wq!