[pstricks] [animate.sty] producing a sequence of Pstricks files

[Patrick Drechsler]

Dear Alan,

Alan Ristow <ristow at ece.gatech.edu> writes:

> Patrick Drechsler wrote:
>> 
>> I would like to produce a sequence of individual pstricks files. Is
>> there a LaTeX (or Pstricks) method to do this?
>
> In the past I have done that by simply creating a .tex file with 
> \pagestyle{empty} that contains nothing but my PSTricks code, compiling, 
> and converting to .ps or .pdf by the usual means. I use Ghostscript 
> (usually via Ghostview or ps2eps) to convert the .ps to .eps.

Yes, thanks to Herbert and Jürgen I know see how this can be done using
"\multido" and "\whiledo". As to my original query, which wasn't phrased
very good (sorry for the confusion): See my answer to Jürgen.

>> Example: Can I produce these 3 files from a single tex file?
>
> To produce multiple graphic files from a single .tex file I find pst-pdf 
> handy. While it is intended for using pdfTeX with PSTricks, it has the 
> "side effect" of producing a .ps file and .pdf file containing nothing 
> but the graphics in your document, one to a page.

This is fine, as the animate package can also read the *-pics.pdf file
output from pst-pdf (as long as it is created with an up-to-date version
of ghostscript).

>  From there, getting individual .pdf graphics is easy using pdftk with 
> the "burst" option.

Good to know, thanks for the tip!

> Getting individual .eps graphics requires a little bit more
> work. First, I use psselect (part of PSUtils) to extract each page to
> an individual .ps file. Then I use ps2eps (a Perl script that is easy
> to google) to convert each file to .eps via Ghostscript. This process
> would be much simpler if it were scripted, particularly since psselect
> doesn't seem to work in batch mode, but I haven't gotten around to
> doing that.

Thanks for the information. Currently I do not have to go down this
road. But it is noted for potential problems in the future.

> Of course, I'm always interested in anything that might be
> simpler/better, but so far this has worked pretty well for me.

The feedback is appreciated!

Cheers,

Patrick 
-- 
1 + 1 = 3 for large values of 1 and small values of 3. ;-)