I think we uncovered the culprit! The files we received in the 0.2 version used an 'OCRAExtended' font, which was TrueType and Encoding: Ansi.
The files we receive now with 0.95 have 'OCRAExtended', which is TrueType (CID) and Encoding: Entity-H. >From what I've read, the CID font is basically for foreign languages with huge character sets. Is this correct? Is there a reason that the guys who make the PDF need this CID font in version 0.95. The only characters used are numbers (0-9). I swapped the font out in my samples, and combining 200 one-page pdfs dropped from 30+ minutes to a few seconds. This would make all the difference to us, if it is doable from the developers' perspective. What do you think? Thanks! Ed On 01 Dec 2008, at 20:39, egibler wrote: Hi > <snip /> > To me, the smoking gun is the upgrade, but I could be pursuaded > otherwise. > It wouldn't be my first incorrect assumption. I'm hoping to find > the cause, So, the most important question is probably: is there something special about those PDFs? Are there many images, custom fonts, tables ...? Anything that might give us a clue? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/0.95---Acrobat-Performance-Problems-tp20774481p20843484.html Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
