You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@pdfbox.apache.org by Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com> on 2017/06/15 00:37:04 UTC
Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also
applies to 2.0.6)
Hello.
I have noticed with PDFDebugger that the same pdf is rendered differently by pdfbox-2.0.4 and by pdfbox-2.0.5 (pdfbox-2.0.6 produces the same output than pdfbox-2.0.5): the newer versions generate a more pixelated image.
Please find attached a sample pdf and two screenshots of PDFDebugger in version 2.0.4 and in version 2.0.5 (also applies for version 2.0.6).
The old approach is better for our pourposes. Is there a way to revert to the old rendering?
Esteban
Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also
applies to 2.0.6)
Posted by Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>.
Yes, 96 dpi here.
Esteban
________________________________
De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 07:09 p.m.
Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
Ok, now I can confirm it. You wrote "PDFDebugger" in your first post,
but you meant PDFToImage. It does happen as described. The images are
created with 120 dpi here, probably 96 dpi on your system.
I have no idea why, but I'll investigate it and come back to you.
Tilman
Am 15.06.2017 um 20:45 schrieb Esteban R:
> This is what I do (windows 10 environment, java 1.8.0_121). I can upgrade java if needed.
>
>
> C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
>
> C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
> El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
> El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
>
> Directorio de C:\temp
>
> 15/06/2017 15:35 4.107 out1.jpg
> 1 archivos 4.107 bytes
> 0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
>
> C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
>
> C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
> El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
> El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
>
> Directorio de C:\temp
>
> 15/06/2017 15:36 4.286 out1.jpg
> 1 archivos 4.286 bytes
> 0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
>
> C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.6.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
>
> C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
> El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
> El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
>
> Directorio de C:\temp
>
> 15/06/2017 15:36 4.286 out1.jpg
> 1 archivos 4.286 bytes
> 0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
>
> C:\temp>java -version
> java version "1.8.0_121"
> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_121-b13)
> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.121-b13, mixed mode)
>
>
> In my case out1.jpg has a different size (4.107 vs 4.286). If you compare visually the output, files are almost the same, the difference is visible when you zoom in.
>
> My screen should be at 100% (how can I check?).
>
> Esteban
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 06:29 p.m.
> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>
> Am 15.06.2017 um 20:19 schrieb Esteban R:
>> I'm sorry. I was not using exactly pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar but pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (maybe a snapshot build?). I'm not sure where did I get that version. I have tryied with pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar and the output is the same than in version 2.0.6.
>>
>>
>> So, I tried again with pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar (downloaded from https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3) and It produces the same output than pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (so the change is between versions 2.0.3 and 2.0.4).
Maven Repository: org.apache.pdfbox » pdfbox-app » 2.0.3<https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3>
mvnrepository.com
org.apache.pdfbox pdfbox-app
> Maven Repository: org.apache.pdfbox » pdfbox-app » 2.0.3<https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3>
Maven Repository: org.apache.pdfbox » pdfbox-app » 2.0.3<https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3>
mvnrepository.com
org.apache.pdfbox pdfbox-app
> mvnrepository.com
> org.apache.pdfbox pdfbox-app
>
>
>
>
> Same rendering in PDFDebugger for me, regardless whether jdk8 or jdk9.
>
> Tilman
>
>
>
>> Esteban
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:33 p.m.
>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>
>> Am 15.06.2017 um 18:20 schrieb Esteban R:
>>> Warning: don't use the following link to download de pdf: <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO> (seems to be a malicious page, I tried to remove the link while writing the e-mail, but that part was kept anyways)
>> done
>>
>>> .
>>>
>>> Use this one instead:
>>>
>>> http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf
>> Thanks... disregard my theory about PDFBOX-1958. But I am not able to
>> reproduce the effect with jdk8. With jdk9 there is an effect but it
>> looks better for me (my screen is on 125%).
>>
>> The PDFToImage results are identical.
>>
>> What jdk are you using? What OS, and do you have a screen that is not
>> set at 100% ?
>>
>> Tilman
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Esteban
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> De: Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>
>>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:09 p.m.
>>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>>
>>> These links should work for at least a week:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Screenshots:
>>>
>>> https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>
>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>
> ]
>>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>>
>> ]
>>> (2.0.4)
>>>
>>> https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>>
>>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>>
>> ]
>>> (2.0.5)
>>>
>>>
>>> PDF:
>>>
>>> <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO>http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf (need to click the "Download" button)
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
>>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 03:35 p.m.
>>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>>
>>> Am 15.06.2017 um 02:37 schrieb Esteban R:
>>>> Hello.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have noticed with PDFDebugger that the same pdf is rendered
>>>> differently by pdfbox-2.0.4 and by pdfbox-2.0.5 (pdfbox-2.0.6 produces
>>>> the same output than pdfbox-2.0.5): the newer versions generate a more
>>>> pixelated image.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please find attached a sample pdf and two screenshots of PDFDebugger
>>>> in version 2.0.4 and in version 2.0.5 (also applies for version 2.0.6).
>>>>
>>> Please upload a PDF to a sharehoster, attachments don't get through. It
>>> *might* be
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> see the last two comments I made there. Without the change some files
>>> would not be rendered at all.
>>>
>>>
>>>> The old approach is better for our pourposes. Is there a way to revert
>>>> to the old rendering?
>>>>
>>> By using 2.0.4, obviously. Alternatively build from source code a 2.0.6
>>> version, and try to revert the commit mentioned in the issue above. It
>>> is possible because the change did not touch very much.
>>>
>>> But I'd still be interested in seeing your PDF.
>>>
>>> Tilman
>>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@pdfbox.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@pdfbox.apache.org
Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also
applies to 2.0.6)
Posted by Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>.
Great! I have tried with pdfbox-app-2.0.7-20170615.210220-70.jar and it generates the same output than pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar.
Esteban
________________________________
De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 09:04 p.m.
Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
Aaaaarghhhhhh!!!!!
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-3523
see near the bottom:
Commit 1763621 from Tilman Hausherr
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=tilman> in
branch 'pdfbox/branches/2.0'
[ https://svn.apache.org/r1763621 ]
PDFBOX-3523 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-3523>: disable
high quality interpolation if image is scaled up by ctm AND xform
(temporary commit)
I then waited for feedback of the user who wrote "Alright, I will try it
again, probably, tomorrow", and never got it, and forgot to revert the
change that you're complaining about (rightfully!).
I have reverted the change, and will think whether to make it
configurable, or just do nothing.
A snapshot is available here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.7-SNAPSHOT/
it is at the bottom of the page, the number must be 70 or higher.
Tilman
Am 15.06.2017 um 21:09 schrieb Tilman Hausherr:
> Ok, now I can confirm it. You wrote "PDFDebugger" in your first post,
> but you meant PDFToImage. It does happen as described. The images are
> created with 120 dpi here, probably 96 dpi on your system.
>
> I have no idea why, but I'll investigate it and come back to you.
>
> Tilman
>
> Am 15.06.2017 um 20:45 schrieb Esteban R:
>> This is what I do (windows 10 environment, java 1.8.0_121). I can
>> upgrade java if needed.
>>
>>
>> C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
>>
>> C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
>> El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
>> El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
>>
>> Directorio de C:\temp
>>
>> 15/06/2017 15:35 4.107 out1.jpg
>> 1 archivos 4.107 bytes
>> 0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
>>
>> C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
>>
>> C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
>> El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
>> El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
>>
>> Directorio de C:\temp
>>
>> 15/06/2017 15:36 4.286 out1.jpg
>> 1 archivos 4.286 bytes
>> 0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
>>
>> C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.6.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
>>
>> C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
>> El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
>> El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
>>
>> Directorio de C:\temp
>>
>> 15/06/2017 15:36 4.286 out1.jpg
>> 1 archivos 4.286 bytes
>> 0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
>>
>> C:\temp>java -version
>> java version "1.8.0_121"
>> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_121-b13)
>> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.121-b13, mixed mode)
>>
>>
>> In my case out1.jpg has a different size (4.107 vs 4.286). If you
>> compare visually the output, files are almost the same, the
>> difference is visible when you zoom in.
>>
>> My screen should be at 100% (how can I check?).
>>
>> Esteban
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 06:29 p.m.
>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5
>> (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>
>> Am 15.06.2017 um 20:19 schrieb Esteban R:
>>> I'm sorry. I was not using exactly pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar but
>>> pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (maybe a snapshot build?).
>>> I'm not sure where did I get that version. I have tryied with
>>> pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar and the output is the same than in version 2.0.6.
>>>
>>>
>>> So, I tried again with pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar (downloaded from
>>> https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3)
Maven Repository: org.apache.pdfbox » pdfbox-app » 2.0.3<https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3>
mvnrepository.com
org.apache.pdfbox pdfbox-app
>>> and It produces the same output than
>>> pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (so the change is between
>>> versions 2.0.3 and 2.0.4).
>> Maven Repository: org.apache.pdfbox » pdfbox-app »
>> 2.0.3<https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3>
Maven Repository: org.apache.pdfbox » pdfbox-app » 2.0.3<https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3>
mvnrepository.com
org.apache.pdfbox pdfbox-app
>> mvnrepository.com
>> org.apache.pdfbox pdfbox-app
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Same rendering in PDFDebugger for me, regardless whether jdk8 or jdk9.
>>
>> Tilman
>>
>>
>>
>>> Esteban
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
>>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:33 p.m.
>>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5
>>> (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>>
>>> Am 15.06.2017 um 18:20 schrieb Esteban R:
>>>> Warning: don't use the following link to download de pdf:
>>>> <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO> (seems to be a malicious page, I
>>>> tried to remove the link while writing the e-mail, but that part
>>>> was kept anyways)
>>> done
>>>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> Use this one instead:
>>>>
>>>> http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf
>>> Thanks... disregard my theory about PDFBOX-1958. But I am not able to
>>> reproduce the effect with jdk8. With jdk9 there is an effect but it
>>> looks better for me (my screen is on 125%).
>>>
>>> The PDFToImage results are identical.
>>>
>>> What jdk are you using? What OS, and do you have a screen that is not
>>> set at 100% ?
>>>
>>> Tilman
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Esteban
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> De: Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>
>>>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:09 p.m.
>>>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>>>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and
>>>> 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>>>
>>>> These links should work for at least a week:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Screenshots:
>>>>
>>>> https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>>
>>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>>
>> ]
>>>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
>>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>>>
>>> ]
>>>> (2.0.4)
>>>>
>>>> https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
>>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>>>
>>>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
>>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>>>
>>> ]
>>>> (2.0.5)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PDF:
>>>>
>>>> <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO>http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf
>>>> (need to click the "Download" button)
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
>>>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 03:35 p.m.
>>>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>>>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and
>>>> 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>>>
>>>> Am 15.06.2017 um 02:37 schrieb Esteban R:
>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have noticed with PDFDebugger that the same pdf is rendered
>>>>> differently by pdfbox-2.0.4 and by pdfbox-2.0.5 (pdfbox-2.0.6
>>>>> produces
>>>>> the same output than pdfbox-2.0.5): the newer versions generate a
>>>>> more
>>>>> pixelated image.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please find attached a sample pdf and two screenshots of PDFDebugger
>>>>> in version 2.0.4 and in version 2.0.5 (also applies for version
>>>>> 2.0.6).
>>>>>
>>>> Please upload a PDF to a sharehoster, attachments don't get
>>>> through. It
>>>> *might* be
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> issues.apache.org
>>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> issues.apache.org
>>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> issues.apache.org
>>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> see the last two comments I made there. Without the change some files
>>>> would not be rendered at all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The old approach is better for our pourposes. Is there a way to
>>>>> revert
>>>>> to the old rendering?
>>>>>
>>>> By using 2.0.4, obviously. Alternatively build from source code a
>>>> 2.0.6
>>>> version, and try to revert the commit mentioned in the issue above. It
>>>> is possible because the change did not touch very much.
>>>>
>>>> But I'd still be interested in seeing your PDF.
>>>>
>>>> Tilman
>>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@pdfbox.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@pdfbox.apache.org
>
Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also
applies to 2.0.6)
Posted by Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>.
Aaaaarghhhhhh!!!!!
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-3523
see near the bottom:
Commit 1763621 from Tilman Hausherr
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=tilman> in
branch 'pdfbox/branches/2.0'
[ https://svn.apache.org/r1763621 ]
PDFBOX-3523 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-3523>: disable
high quality interpolation if image is scaled up by ctm AND xform
(temporary commit)
I then waited for feedback of the user who wrote "Alright, I will try it
again, probably, tomorrow", and never got it, and forgot to revert the
change that you're complaining about (rightfully!).
I have reverted the change, and will think whether to make it
configurable, or just do nothing.
A snapshot is available here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.7-SNAPSHOT/
it is at the bottom of the page, the number must be 70 or higher.
Tilman
Am 15.06.2017 um 21:09 schrieb Tilman Hausherr:
> Ok, now I can confirm it. You wrote "PDFDebugger" in your first post,
> but you meant PDFToImage. It does happen as described. The images are
> created with 120 dpi here, probably 96 dpi on your system.
>
> I have no idea why, but I'll investigate it and come back to you.
>
> Tilman
>
> Am 15.06.2017 um 20:45 schrieb Esteban R:
>> This is what I do (windows 10 environment, java 1.8.0_121). I can
>> upgrade java if needed.
>>
>>
>> C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
>>
>> C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
>> El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
>> El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
>>
>> Directorio de C:\temp
>>
>> 15/06/2017 15:35 4.107 out1.jpg
>> 1 archivos 4.107 bytes
>> 0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
>>
>> C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
>>
>> C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
>> El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
>> El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
>>
>> Directorio de C:\temp
>>
>> 15/06/2017 15:36 4.286 out1.jpg
>> 1 archivos 4.286 bytes
>> 0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
>>
>> C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.6.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
>>
>> C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
>> El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
>> El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
>>
>> Directorio de C:\temp
>>
>> 15/06/2017 15:36 4.286 out1.jpg
>> 1 archivos 4.286 bytes
>> 0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
>>
>> C:\temp>java -version
>> java version "1.8.0_121"
>> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_121-b13)
>> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.121-b13, mixed mode)
>>
>>
>> In my case out1.jpg has a different size (4.107 vs 4.286). If you
>> compare visually the output, files are almost the same, the
>> difference is visible when you zoom in.
>>
>> My screen should be at 100% (how can I check?).
>>
>> Esteban
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 06:29 p.m.
>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5
>> (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>
>> Am 15.06.2017 um 20:19 schrieb Esteban R:
>>> I'm sorry. I was not using exactly pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar but
>>> pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (maybe a snapshot build?).
>>> I'm not sure where did I get that version. I have tryied with
>>> pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar and the output is the same than in version 2.0.6.
>>>
>>>
>>> So, I tried again with pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar (downloaded from
>>> https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3)
>>> and It produces the same output than
>>> pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (so the change is between
>>> versions 2.0.3 and 2.0.4).
>> Maven Repository: org.apache.pdfbox » pdfbox-app »
>> 2.0.3<https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3>
>> mvnrepository.com
>> org.apache.pdfbox pdfbox-app
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Same rendering in PDFDebugger for me, regardless whether jdk8 or jdk9.
>>
>> Tilman
>>
>>
>>
>>> Esteban
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
>>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:33 p.m.
>>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5
>>> (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>>
>>> Am 15.06.2017 um 18:20 schrieb Esteban R:
>>>> Warning: don't use the following link to download de pdf:
>>>> <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO> (seems to be a malicious page, I
>>>> tried to remove the link while writing the e-mail, but that part
>>>> was kept anyways)
>>> done
>>>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> Use this one instead:
>>>>
>>>> http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf
>>> Thanks... disregard my theory about PDFBOX-1958. But I am not able to
>>> reproduce the effect with jdk8. With jdk9 there is an effect but it
>>> looks better for me (my screen is on 125%).
>>>
>>> The PDFToImage results are identical.
>>>
>>> What jdk are you using? What OS, and do you have a screen that is not
>>> set at 100% ?
>>>
>>> Tilman
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Esteban
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> De: Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>
>>>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:09 p.m.
>>>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>>>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and
>>>> 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>>>
>>>> These links should work for at least a week:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Screenshots:
>>>>
>>>> https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>>
>>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>>
>> ]
>>>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
>>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>>>
>>> ]
>>>> (2.0.4)
>>>>
>>>> https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
>>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>>>
>>>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
>>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>>>
>>> ]
>>>> (2.0.5)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PDF:
>>>>
>>>> <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO>http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf
>>>> (need to click the "Download" button)
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
>>>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 03:35 p.m.
>>>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>>>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and
>>>> 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>>>
>>>> Am 15.06.2017 um 02:37 schrieb Esteban R:
>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have noticed with PDFDebugger that the same pdf is rendered
>>>>> differently by pdfbox-2.0.4 and by pdfbox-2.0.5 (pdfbox-2.0.6
>>>>> produces
>>>>> the same output than pdfbox-2.0.5): the newer versions generate a
>>>>> more
>>>>> pixelated image.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please find attached a sample pdf and two screenshots of PDFDebugger
>>>>> in version 2.0.4 and in version 2.0.5 (also applies for version
>>>>> 2.0.6).
>>>>>
>>>> Please upload a PDF to a sharehoster, attachments don't get
>>>> through. It
>>>> *might* be
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> issues.apache.org
>>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is
>>> ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> issues.apache.org
>>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> issues.apache.org
>>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached
>>>> file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able
>>>> to get the image in another ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> see the last two comments I made there. Without the change some files
>>>> would not be rendered at all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The old approach is better for our pourposes. Is there a way to
>>>>> revert
>>>>> to the old rendering?
>>>>>
>>>> By using 2.0.4, obviously. Alternatively build from source code a
>>>> 2.0.6
>>>> version, and try to revert the commit mentioned in the issue above. It
>>>> is possible because the change did not touch very much.
>>>>
>>>> But I'd still be interested in seeing your PDF.
>>>>
>>>> Tilman
>>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@pdfbox.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@pdfbox.apache.org
>
Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also
applies to 2.0.6)
Posted by Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>.
Ok, now I can confirm it. You wrote "PDFDebugger" in your first post,
but you meant PDFToImage. It does happen as described. The images are
created with 120 dpi here, probably 96 dpi on your system.
I have no idea why, but I'll investigate it and come back to you.
Tilman
Am 15.06.2017 um 20:45 schrieb Esteban R:
> This is what I do (windows 10 environment, java 1.8.0_121). I can upgrade java if needed.
>
>
> C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
>
> C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
> El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
> El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
>
> Directorio de C:\temp
>
> 15/06/2017 15:35 4.107 out1.jpg
> 1 archivos 4.107 bytes
> 0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
>
> C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
>
> C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
> El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
> El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
>
> Directorio de C:\temp
>
> 15/06/2017 15:36 4.286 out1.jpg
> 1 archivos 4.286 bytes
> 0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
>
> C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.6.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
>
> C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
> El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
> El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
>
> Directorio de C:\temp
>
> 15/06/2017 15:36 4.286 out1.jpg
> 1 archivos 4.286 bytes
> 0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
>
> C:\temp>java -version
> java version "1.8.0_121"
> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_121-b13)
> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.121-b13, mixed mode)
>
>
> In my case out1.jpg has a different size (4.107 vs 4.286). If you compare visually the output, files are almost the same, the difference is visible when you zoom in.
>
> My screen should be at 100% (how can I check?).
>
> Esteban
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 06:29 p.m.
> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>
> Am 15.06.2017 um 20:19 schrieb Esteban R:
>> I'm sorry. I was not using exactly pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar but pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (maybe a snapshot build?). I'm not sure where did I get that version. I have tryied with pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar and the output is the same than in version 2.0.6.
>>
>>
>> So, I tried again with pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar (downloaded from https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3) and It produces the same output than pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (so the change is between versions 2.0.3 and 2.0.4).
> Maven Repository: org.apache.pdfbox » pdfbox-app » 2.0.3<https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3>
> mvnrepository.com
> org.apache.pdfbox pdfbox-app
>
>
>
>
> Same rendering in PDFDebugger for me, regardless whether jdk8 or jdk9.
>
> Tilman
>
>
>
>> Esteban
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:33 p.m.
>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>
>> Am 15.06.2017 um 18:20 schrieb Esteban R:
>>> Warning: don't use the following link to download de pdf: <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO> (seems to be a malicious page, I tried to remove the link while writing the e-mail, but that part was kept anyways)
>> done
>>
>>> .
>>>
>>> Use this one instead:
>>>
>>> http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf
>> Thanks... disregard my theory about PDFBOX-1958. But I am not able to
>> reproduce the effect with jdk8. With jdk9 there is an effect but it
>> looks better for me (my screen is on 125%).
>>
>> The PDFToImage results are identical.
>>
>> What jdk are you using? What OS, and do you have a screen that is not
>> set at 100% ?
>>
>> Tilman
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Esteban
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> De: Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>
>>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:09 p.m.
>>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>>
>>> These links should work for at least a week:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Screenshots:
>>>
>>> https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>
>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>
> ]
>>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>>
>> ]
>>> (2.0.4)
>>>
>>> https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>>
>>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>>
>> ]
>>> (2.0.5)
>>>
>>>
>>> PDF:
>>>
>>> <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO>http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf (need to click the "Download" button)
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
>>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 03:35 p.m.
>>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>>
>>> Am 15.06.2017 um 02:37 schrieb Esteban R:
>>>> Hello.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have noticed with PDFDebugger that the same pdf is rendered
>>>> differently by pdfbox-2.0.4 and by pdfbox-2.0.5 (pdfbox-2.0.6 produces
>>>> the same output than pdfbox-2.0.5): the newer versions generate a more
>>>> pixelated image.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please find attached a sample pdf and two screenshots of PDFDebugger
>>>> in version 2.0.4 and in version 2.0.5 (also applies for version 2.0.6).
>>>>
>>> Please upload a PDF to a sharehoster, attachments don't get through. It
>>> *might* be
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> issues.apache.org
>>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> see the last two comments I made there. Without the change some files
>>> would not be rendered at all.
>>>
>>>
>>>> The old approach is better for our pourposes. Is there a way to revert
>>>> to the old rendering?
>>>>
>>> By using 2.0.4, obviously. Alternatively build from source code a 2.0.6
>>> version, and try to revert the commit mentioned in the issue above. It
>>> is possible because the change did not touch very much.
>>>
>>> But I'd still be interested in seeing your PDF.
>>>
>>> Tilman
>>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@pdfbox.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@pdfbox.apache.org
Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also
applies to 2.0.6)
Posted by Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>.
This is what I do (windows 10 environment, java 1.8.0_121). I can upgrade java if needed.
C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
Directorio de C:\temp
15/06/2017 15:35 4.107 out1.jpg
1 archivos 4.107 bytes
0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
Directorio de C:\temp
15/06/2017 15:36 4.286 out1.jpg
1 archivos 4.286 bytes
0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
C:\temp>java -jar pdfbox-app-2.0.6.jar PDFToImage out.pdf
C:\temp>dir out1.jpg
El volumen de la unidad C no tiene etiqueta.
El número de serie del volumen es: 98F8-8920
Directorio de C:\temp
15/06/2017 15:36 4.286 out1.jpg
1 archivos 4.286 bytes
0 dirs 52.658.810.880 bytes libres
C:\temp>java -version
java version "1.8.0_121"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_121-b13)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.121-b13, mixed mode)
In my case out1.jpg has a different size (4.107 vs 4.286). If you compare visually the output, files are almost the same, the difference is visible when you zoom in.
My screen should be at 100% (how can I check?).
Esteban
________________________________
De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 06:29 p.m.
Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
Am 15.06.2017 um 20:19 schrieb Esteban R:
> I'm sorry. I was not using exactly pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar but pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (maybe a snapshot build?). I'm not sure where did I get that version. I have tryied with pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar and the output is the same than in version 2.0.6.
>
>
> So, I tried again with pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar (downloaded from https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3) and It produces the same output than pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (so the change is between versions 2.0.3 and 2.0.4).
Maven Repository: org.apache.pdfbox » pdfbox-app » 2.0.3<https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3>
mvnrepository.com
org.apache.pdfbox pdfbox-app
Same rendering in PDFDebugger for me, regardless whether jdk8 or jdk9.
Tilman
>
> Esteban
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:33 p.m.
> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>
> Am 15.06.2017 um 18:20 schrieb Esteban R:
>> Warning: don't use the following link to download de pdf: <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO> (seems to be a malicious page, I tried to remove the link while writing the e-mail, but that part was kept anyways)
> done
>
>> .
>>
>> Use this one instead:
>>
>> http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf
> Thanks... disregard my theory about PDFBOX-1958. But I am not able to
> reproduce the effect with jdk8. With jdk9 there is an effect but it
> looks better for me (my screen is on 125%).
>
> The PDFToImage results are identical.
>
> What jdk are you using? What OS, and do you have a screen that is not
> set at 100% ?
>
> Tilman
>
>
>
>
>> Esteban
>>
>> ________________________________
>> De: Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>
>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:09 p.m.
>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>
>> These links should work for at least a week:
>>
>>
>>
>> Screenshots:
>>
>> https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
[https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
[https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
]
>
>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>
> ]
>> (2.0.4)
>>
>> https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>
>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>
> ]
>> (2.0.5)
>>
>>
>> PDF:
>>
>> <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO>http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf (need to click the "Download" button)
>>
>> ________________________________
>> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 03:35 p.m.
>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>
>> Am 15.06.2017 um 02:37 schrieb Esteban R:
>>> Hello.
>>>
>>>
>>> I have noticed with PDFDebugger that the same pdf is rendered
>>> differently by pdfbox-2.0.4 and by pdfbox-2.0.5 (pdfbox-2.0.6 produces
>>> the same output than pdfbox-2.0.5): the newer versions generate a more
>>> pixelated image.
>>>
>>>
>>> Please find attached a sample pdf and two screenshots of PDFDebugger
>>> in version 2.0.4 and in version 2.0.5 (also applies for version 2.0.6).
>>>
>> Please upload a PDF to a sharehoster, attachments don't get through. It
>> *might* be
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>> see the last two comments I made there. Without the change some files
>> would not be rendered at all.
>>
>>
>>> The old approach is better for our pourposes. Is there a way to revert
>>> to the old rendering?
>>>
>> By using 2.0.4, obviously. Alternatively build from source code a 2.0.6
>> version, and try to revert the commit mentioned in the issue above. It
>> is possible because the change did not touch very much.
>>
>> But I'd still be interested in seeing your PDF.
>>
>> Tilman
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@pdfbox.apache.org
Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also
applies to 2.0.6)
Posted by Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>.
Am 15.06.2017 um 20:19 schrieb Esteban R:
> I'm sorry. I was not using exactly pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar but pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (maybe a snapshot build?). I'm not sure where did I get that version. I have tryied with pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar and the output is the same than in version 2.0.6.
>
>
> So, I tried again with pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar (downloaded from https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3) and It produces the same output than pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (so the change is between versions 2.0.3 and 2.0.4).
Same rendering in PDFDebugger for me, regardless whether jdk8 or jdk9.
Tilman
>
> Esteban
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:33 p.m.
> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>
> Am 15.06.2017 um 18:20 schrieb Esteban R:
>> Warning: don't use the following link to download de pdf: <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO> (seems to be a malicious page, I tried to remove the link while writing the e-mail, but that part was kept anyways)
> done
>
>> .
>>
>> Use this one instead:
>>
>> http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf
> Thanks... disregard my theory about PDFBOX-1958. But I am not able to
> reproduce the effect with jdk8. With jdk9 there is an effect but it
> looks better for me (my screen is on 125%).
>
> The PDFToImage results are identical.
>
> What jdk are you using? What OS, and do you have a screen that is not
> set at 100% ?
>
> Tilman
>
>
>
>
>> Esteban
>>
>> ________________________________
>> De: Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>
>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:09 p.m.
>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>
>> These links should work for at least a week:
>>
>>
>>
>> Screenshots:
>>
>> https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>
>> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>
> ]
>> (2.0.4)
>>
>> https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>
>> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>
> ]
>> (2.0.5)
>>
>>
>> PDF:
>>
>> <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO>http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf (need to click the "Download" button)
>>
>> ________________________________
>> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
>> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 03:35 p.m.
>> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
>> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>>
>> Am 15.06.2017 um 02:37 schrieb Esteban R:
>>> Hello.
>>>
>>>
>>> I have noticed with PDFDebugger that the same pdf is rendered
>>> differently by pdfbox-2.0.4 and by pdfbox-2.0.5 (pdfbox-2.0.6 produces
>>> the same output than pdfbox-2.0.5): the newer versions generate a more
>>> pixelated image.
>>>
>>>
>>> Please find attached a sample pdf and two screenshots of PDFDebugger
>>> in version 2.0.4 and in version 2.0.5 (also applies for version 2.0.6).
>>>
>> Please upload a PDF to a sharehoster, attachments don't get through. It
>> *might* be
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
>> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>> issues.apache.org
>> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>>
>>
>>
>> see the last two comments I made there. Without the change some files
>> would not be rendered at all.
>>
>>
>>> The old approach is better for our pourposes. Is there a way to revert
>>> to the old rendering?
>>>
>> By using 2.0.4, obviously. Alternatively build from source code a 2.0.6
>> version, and try to revert the commit mentioned in the issue above. It
>> is possible because the change did not touch very much.
>>
>> But I'd still be interested in seeing your PDF.
>>
>> Tilman
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@pdfbox.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@pdfbox.apache.org
Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also
applies to 2.0.6)
Posted by Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>.
I'm sorry. I was not using exactly pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar but pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (maybe a snapshot build?). I'm not sure where did I get that version. I have tryied with pdfbox-app-2.0.4.jar and the output is the same than in version 2.0.6.
So, I tried again with pdfbox-app-2.0.3.jar (downloaded from https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.pdfbox/pdfbox-app/2.0.3) and It produces the same output than pdfbox-app-2.0.4-20160925.091907-39.jar (so the change is between versions 2.0.3 and 2.0.4).
Esteban
________________________________
De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:33 p.m.
Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
Am 15.06.2017 um 18:20 schrieb Esteban R:
> Warning: don't use the following link to download de pdf: <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO> (seems to be a malicious page, I tried to remove the link while writing the e-mail, but that part was kept anyways)
done
>
> .
>
> Use this one instead:
>
> http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf
Thanks... disregard my theory about PDFBOX-1958. But I am not able to
reproduce the effect with jdk8. With jdk9 there is an effect but it
looks better for me (my screen is on 125%).
The PDFToImage results are identical.
What jdk are you using? What OS, and do you have a screen that is not
set at 100% ?
Tilman
>
> Esteban
>
> ________________________________
> De: Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>
> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:09 p.m.
> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>
> These links should work for at least a week:
>
>
>
> Screenshots:
>
> https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
[https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>
> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
[https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
]
>
> (2.0.4)
>
> https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
[https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>
> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
[https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
]
>
> (2.0.5)
>
>
> PDF:
>
> <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO>http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf (need to click the "Download" button)
>
> ________________________________
> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 03:35 p.m.
> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>
> Am 15.06.2017 um 02:37 schrieb Esteban R:
>> Hello.
>>
>>
>> I have noticed with PDFDebugger that the same pdf is rendered
>> differently by pdfbox-2.0.4 and by pdfbox-2.0.5 (pdfbox-2.0.6 produces
>> the same output than pdfbox-2.0.5): the newer versions generate a more
>> pixelated image.
>>
>>
>> Please find attached a sample pdf and two screenshots of PDFDebugger
>> in version 2.0.4 and in version 2.0.5 (also applies for version 2.0.6).
>>
> Please upload a PDF to a sharehoster, attachments don't get through. It
> *might* be
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958
[PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
issues.apache.org
This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
[PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
issues.apache.org
This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
[PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
issues.apache.org
This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
[PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
issues.apache.org
This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
> see the last two comments I made there. Without the change some files
> would not be rendered at all.
>
>
>> The old approach is better for our pourposes. Is there a way to revert
>> to the old rendering?
>>
> By using 2.0.4, obviously. Alternatively build from source code a 2.0.6
> version, and try to revert the commit mentioned in the issue above. It
> is possible because the change did not touch very much.
>
> But I'd still be interested in seeing your PDF.
>
> Tilman
>
Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also
applies to 2.0.6)
Posted by Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>.
Am 15.06.2017 um 18:20 schrieb Esteban R:
> Warning: don't use the following link to download de pdf: <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO> (seems to be a malicious page, I tried to remove the link while writing the e-mail, but that part was kept anyways)
done
>
> .
>
> Use this one instead:
>
> http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf
Thanks... disregard my theory about PDFBOX-1958. But I am not able to
reproduce the effect with jdk8. With jdk9 there is an effect but it
looks better for me (my screen is on 125%).
The PDFToImage results are identical.
What jdk are you using? What OS, and do you have a screen that is not
set at 100% ?
Tilman
>
> Esteban
>
> ________________________________
> De: Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>
> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:09 p.m.
> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>
> These links should work for at least a week:
>
>
>
> Screenshots:
>
> https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
>
> [https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
>
> (2.0.4)
>
> https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
>
> [https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
>
> (2.0.5)
>
>
> PDF:
>
> <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO>http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf (need to click the "Download" button)
>
> ________________________________
> De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
> Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 03:35 p.m.
> Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
> Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
>
> Am 15.06.2017 um 02:37 schrieb Esteban R:
>> Hello.
>>
>>
>> I have noticed with PDFDebugger that the same pdf is rendered
>> differently by pdfbox-2.0.4 and by pdfbox-2.0.5 (pdfbox-2.0.6 produces
>> the same output than pdfbox-2.0.5): the newer versions generate a more
>> pixelated image.
>>
>>
>> Please find attached a sample pdf and two screenshots of PDFDebugger
>> in version 2.0.4 and in version 2.0.5 (also applies for version 2.0.6).
>>
> Please upload a PDF to a sharehoster, attachments don't get through. It
> *might* be
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> [PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
> issues.apache.org
> This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
>
>
>
> see the last two comments I made there. Without the change some files
> would not be rendered at all.
>
>
>> The old approach is better for our pourposes. Is there a way to revert
>> to the old rendering?
>>
> By using 2.0.4, obviously. Alternatively build from source code a 2.0.6
> version, and try to revert the commit mentioned in the issue above. It
> is possible because the change did not touch very much.
>
> But I'd still be interested in seeing your PDF.
>
> Tilman
>
Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also
applies to 2.0.6)
Posted by Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>.
Warning: don't use the following link to download de pdf: <http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO> (seems to be a malicious page, I tried to remove the link while writing the e-mail, but that part was kept anyways)
.
Use this one instead:
http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf
Esteban
________________________________
De: Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>
Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 04:09 p.m.
Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
These links should work for at least a week:
Screenshots:
https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg
[https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg]
(2.0.4)
https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg
[https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg]
(2.0.5)
PDF:
<http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO>http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf (need to click the "Download" button)
________________________________
De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 03:35 p.m.
Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
Am 15.06.2017 um 02:37 schrieb Esteban R:
>
> Hello.
>
>
> I have noticed with PDFDebugger that the same pdf is rendered
> differently by pdfbox-2.0.4 and by pdfbox-2.0.5 (pdfbox-2.0.6 produces
> the same output than pdfbox-2.0.5): the newer versions generate a more
> pixelated image.
>
>
> Please find attached a sample pdf and two screenshots of PDFDebugger
> in version 2.0.4 and in version 2.0.5 (also applies for version 2.0.6).
>
Please upload a PDF to a sharehoster, attachments don't get through. It
*might* be
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958
[PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
issues.apache.org
This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
[PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
[PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
issues.apache.org
This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
issues.apache.org
This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
see the last two comments I made there. Without the change some files
would not be rendered at all.
>
> The old approach is better for our pourposes. Is there a way to revert
> to the old rendering?
>
By using 2.0.4, obviously. Alternatively build from source code a 2.0.6
version, and try to revert the commit mentioned in the issue above. It
is possible because the change did not touch very much.
But I'd still be interested in seeing your PDF.
Tilman
Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also
applies to 2.0.6)
Posted by Esteban R <er...@hotmail.com>.
These links should work for at least a week:
Screenshots:
https://img4.file-upload.com/i/00298/5ep2gagcmcna.jpg (2.0.4)
https://img5.file-upload.com/i/00298/8llrhev3r8oz.jpg (2.0.5)
PDF:
<http://file-upload.com/d/6FgO>http://wikisend.com/download/185248/out.pdf (need to click the "Download" button)
________________________________
De: Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>
Enviado: jueves, 15 de junio de 2017 03:35 p.m.
Para: users@pdfbox.apache.org
Asunto: Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also applies to 2.0.6)
Am 15.06.2017 um 02:37 schrieb Esteban R:
>
> Hello.
>
>
> I have noticed with PDFDebugger that the same pdf is rendered
> differently by pdfbox-2.0.4 and by pdfbox-2.0.5 (pdfbox-2.0.6 produces
> the same output than pdfbox-2.0.5): the newer versions generate a more
> pixelated image.
>
>
> Please find attached a sample pdf and two screenshots of PDFDebugger
> in version 2.0.4 and in version 2.0.5 (also applies for version 2.0.6).
>
Please upload a PDF to a sharehoster, attachments don't get through. It
*might* be
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958
[PDFBOX-1958] image mask outline with shading pattern is ...<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958>
issues.apache.org
This is also somewhat of a regression: two weeks ago, the attached file had the image rendered in b/w, now it is invisible. I was able to get the image in another ...
see the last two comments I made there. Without the change some files
would not be rendered at all.
>
> The old approach is better for our pourposes. Is there a way to revert
> to the old rendering?
>
By using 2.0.4, obviously. Alternatively build from source code a 2.0.6
version, and try to revert the commit mentioned in the issue above. It
is possible because the change did not touch very much.
But I'd still be interested in seeing your PDF.
Tilman
Re: Change in image quality between versions 2.0.4 and 2.0.5 (also
applies to 2.0.6)
Posted by Tilman Hausherr <TH...@t-online.de>.
Am 15.06.2017 um 02:37 schrieb Esteban R:
>
> Hello.
>
>
> I have noticed with PDFDebugger that the same pdf is rendered
> differently by pdfbox-2.0.4 and by pdfbox-2.0.5 (pdfbox-2.0.6 produces
> the same output than pdfbox-2.0.5): the newer versions generate a more
> pixelated image.
>
>
> Please find attached a sample pdf and two screenshots of PDFDebugger
> in version 2.0.4 and in version 2.0.5 (also applies for version 2.0.6).
>
Please upload a PDF to a sharehoster, attachments don't get through. It
*might* be
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX-1958
see the last two comments I made there. Without the change some files
would not be rendered at all.
>
> The old approach is better for our pourposes. Is there a way to revert
> to the old rendering?
>
By using 2.0.4, obviously. Alternatively build from source code a 2.0.6
version, and try to revert the commit mentioned in the issue above. It
is possible because the change did not touch very much.
But I'd still be interested in seeing your PDF.
Tilman