LiteView image quality

[peso]

Hi,
To "work around" the poor raster quality you get when printing from MapGuide ActiveX, I'm trying to use LiteView. With the parameter PPIY it shall be possible to increase the resolution of the imge that LiteView produces, but no matter what I set PPIY to, the result is 72 dpi.

Has anyone succeeded using this method? Any tips?

Regards! /Per

[Andy Morsell]

Make sure you are stopping and starting your Java servelet engine (such as
Tomcat) whenever you make a change to your LiteView parameters. You'll also
find that a PPIY other than default does some whacky things to text scaling.
This has been acknowledged as a bug in LiteView but has not been fixed.
--
Andy Morsell, P.E.
Spatial Integrators, Inc.
http://www.SpatialGIS.com

Post by peso
Hi,
To "work around" the poor raster quality you get when printing from
MapGuide ActiveX, I'm trying to use LiteView. With the parameter PPIY it
shall be possible to increase the resolution of the imge that LiteView
produces, but no matter what I set PPIY to, the result is 72 dpi.
Has anyone succeeded using this method? Any tips?
Regards! /Per

[peso]

Thanks for your answer!

Q1: But, do I have to restart Tomcat even if I send the PPIY in a map request?

Q2: Is LiteView a possible solution to our poor raster print quality?

Regards, Per

[Andy Morsell]

If you specify PPIY for the map request, then no, Tomcat does not have to be
restarted. That PPIY takes precedence over the one set in the config.ini
file.

I'm not sure using LiteView is going to help you achieve better raster print
quality. Keep in mind that it's still a MapGuide request that is rendered
as an image on the server and that image is then sent to the client. So, if
you have raster image layers, the result via LiteView will probably not be
any better (and will probably be worse) then what you would see in the
ActiveX viewer.

Andy

Post by peso
Thanks for your answer!
Q1: But, do I have to restart Tomcat even if I send the PPIY in a map request?
Q2: Is LiteView a possible solution to our poor raster print quality?
Regards, Per