>> Is this expected, probably a side effect of your latest changes? I
>> uncompressed the PDFs using `pdftk` and did a comparison;
>> unfortunately I couldn't see big differences in the diff file,
>> which probably hints at small but many changes that accumulate to
>> the 15% difference.
>
> If I understand correctly, it is due to the difference in the method
> of invoking Ghostscript.
Thanks a lot for your analysis.
> From the same PostScript file, the new method generates a PDF of
> 7081 bytes and the old method generates a PDF of 6423 bytes. The
> new method is more than 10 % larger than the old method.
Do you consider this a bug in gs or a feature?
> From `old-to-new.diff`, it seems that the amount of drawing
> operators in the /Contents has increased significantly.
OK. What do you think about opening a ghostscript issue, asking the
developers for an explanation? Maybe our new method can be slightly
adapted to avoid the size increase.
Werner
