Hi, I just tried to read the PDF with both Foxit Reader v2.3 and Adobe Reader 8.1.2. Foxit Reader gives expected color, while Adobe Reader Doesn't.
HTH, Pascal > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Jeremias Maerki [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Envoyé : jeudi 10 juillet 2008 14:29 > > On 10.07.2008 13:28:05 Dominique Bourely wrote: > > > > Excuse me for the delay. > > More explicetely, the PNG image loses the brilliance when > included in PDF > > with FOP. > > I attach an example of such a PDF ( > > http://www.nabble.com/file/p18380833/test-png-sans-output.pdf > > test-png-sans-output.pdf ) and the original image source ( > > http://www.nabble.com/file/p18380833/img-test.png img-test.png ). > > On the opposite, when I use Acrobat Distiller to produce a > PDF from the > > image (through Photoshop for instance), I am proposed to > incorpore a color > > profile, and if (and only if) I accept and choose sRGB, the > result is > > correct. > > Can you send me that PDF that you produced with Photoshop? When I > produce PDF through means other than FOP, I get either sRGB > with washed > out colors or Device RGB or DeviceCMYK. > > > So our idea was to simplify the PNG decoder class to avoid > image treatment. > > There's no "treatment" or the image itself, just evaluation of > information inside the image being loaded. FOP reacts on the and tries > to put the right information inside the PDF. > > > Could you help us estimate the workload to achieve this ? > > You mean you want to write an option to ignore color profiles > on images? > Here's what would be necessary: > > There's already a configuration option that lets you disable > the default > sRGB color profile which is necessary for making sure all > XSL-FO colors > are mapped to PDF properly. > http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/trunk/configuration.html#pdf > -renderer > > Switching this on will make it impossible to create PDF/A or > PDF/X-3:2003. > > The key change is in > org.apache.fop.render.pdf.ImageRenderedAdapter (in > the case of PNG images) where you'd need to override the ColorSpace > sent to the PDF library with the device-specific variant. > > Then you'll need a way to signal that into the code. You can define an > extension attribute for fo:external-graphic (like > fox:ignore-color-profile="true") that is evaluated in > PDFRenderer.putImage(). I assume the AbstractImageAdapter will need to > be changed to carry that signal. > > Please note: I consider this a hack or a desperate measure if all else > fails. Ignoring the color management is a way to fall back to > device-specific colors which is known to produce the color > fidelity you > expect on screen. I'd rather find out if there's a bug in the way FOP > handles color profiles. But if I see so many other programs fail at > producing the colors you expect I have low hopes. Maybe your PDF gives > me a clue. > > > > > Jeremias Maerki-2 wrote: > > > > > > FOP 0.95beta uses the sRGB color space by default (because XSL-FO > > > defines all RGB colors in the sRGB color space). FOP > always embeds an > > > sRGB color profile. So specifying another sRGB color > space explicitely > > > doesn't have any effect. Can you elaborate on what you > mean by "an issue > > > regarding color brilliance"? > > > > > > Please also see my previous answers on similar questions: > > > http://www.nabble.com/file/p18380833/test-png-sans-output.pdf > > > test-png-sans-output.pdf > > > http://markmail.org/message/3tuims2gjbconya5 > > > http://markmail.org/message/qithk3gcoyrane3a > > > > > > For FOP Trunk, the sRGB disabling option might be > something related to > > > this: > > > > http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/trunk/configuration.html#pdf > -renderer > > > > > > On 30.06.2008 10:35:13 Dominique Bourely wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> We use FOP extensively and we are facing now an issue > regarding color > > >> brilliance of some of our included images. > > >> To keep this brilliance in the result PDF, we tried to > use the sRGB Color > > >> Space Profile.icm in the conf file. > > >> But with no effect. > > >> > > >> We use FOP 0.95b, along with xml-common-graphics-1.3.1 > > >> > > >> Has someone any idea ? > > Jeremias Maerki --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
