I find that when I use mathptmx, some math symbols, including the summation and product symbols, are rendered differently depending on whether I use pdfTeX or I work via DVI.
Here is sample code:
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{mathptmx}
\begin{document}
\[
\sum_{n = 1}^{\infty} A_n = \prod_{n = 1}^{\infty} B_n
\]
\end{document}
When I use pdfTeX, I get what I assume to be what is expected, but when I create a PDF via a DVI file, I still get the summation and product symbols, but they clearly belong to a different font (thin and elongated).
The infinity symbol also changes. (It gets rounder via DVI).
A_n and B_n do not change.
This is what I get when I use pdfTeX:
And this is what I get via DVI:
I want to use mathptmx, but at the same time, I need to work via DVI because of another package that requires it (tree-dvips).
Could somebody please help me out with getting the normal symbols even via DVI?
I use Mac OS X Mountain Lion and TeXShop.
Below is the console message that I get when I typeset with pdfTeX:
Below is the console message that I get when I typeset via DVI:
[Update]
I updated my LaTeX to version 3.1415926-2.5-1.40.14 (TeX Live 2013).
The problem then disappeared!
mafp, karlkoeller, thanks a ton for helping me with solving the problem.
I still wonder, though, what that strange font was, and why this happened…
Best Answer
The messages of
dvips
show that onlycmr10.pfb
is embedded, not the fonts for the standard PostScript fonts. If the PDF file does not contain the fonts, if depends on the PDF viewer, which fonts are used. Newer versions of Acrobat Reader have replaced some of the standard fonts by other, e.g. Times Roman by Minion Pro.Comparisons
Messages of
dvips
with embedded fonts:Using option
-Pbuiltin35
:The latter looks quite similar to your messages of
dvips. In theory
-Poutline` should have embedded all available Type 1 fonts, thus there was an deficiency in your older LaTeX installation.The result after converting to PDF (
ps2pdf
) shows that some fonts are not embedded in the latter case.In the first case
pdffonts
reports:And in the latter case:
Viewing the result in AR9/Linux, first the PDF file with the embedded fonts (URW fonts):
Then the fonts that are used by the PDF viewer, Minion Pro instead of Times Roman in case of AR9/Linux:
Differences:
n
\infty
A
andB
Summary
This example shows, why it is highly recommended to always embed fonts into the PDF file. Otherwise the PDF viewer is free to choose a font that it likes and not the font that the author of the PDF had in mind.
Why
-Poutline
has not worked, is probably difficult to investigate, unless you have a backup of your old system and are willing to investigate further. But I do not think it is worth the trouble, since the problem is solved on an updated system.