Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!.POSTED.71Q9Duyz+fR2Jgd55oPzNg.user.gioia.aioe.org!not-for-mail From: "Rob Hemmings (News)" Newsgroups: comp.sys.acorn.programmer Subject: Re: Odd results from GhostScript Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 19:04:31 +0100 Organization: None Lines: 48 Message-ID: <587e8a2dferhnews@dsl.pipex.com> References: <587e72e8f9rhnews@dsl.pipex.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 71Q9Duyz+fR2Jgd55oPzNg.user.gioia.aioe.org X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Pluto/3.16 (RISC OS/5.25) NewsHound/v1.52-32 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.acorn.programmer:6149 In article , Theo wrote: > "Rob Hemmings (News)" wrote: > > I'm using version 9.2 of GhostScript on Windows and that is producing > > consistent results with any type of pdf file. On RISC OS I get a > > believable result if I use a pdf file that has been created on Windows > > with colour in CMYK format although a little oddly the results are > > slightly different from those produced on Windows with the same file > > which I would have expected to be the same. > > > > However, much more of a problem on RISC OS is that with a pdf file > > that has not been created in CMYK colour it reports exactly the same > > (incorrect) figure for each ink instead of giving the correct > > proportions. Running GhostScript on the same file on Windows gives a > > correct result with the usage of each ink being different. Can > > anyone suggest what might be going on? > > > How strange. It appears there are two devices, 'ink_cov' and 'inkcov' > which follow different code paths: > https://github.com/ArtifexSoftware/ghostpdl/blob/master/devices/gdevicov.c > Are you sure you're using the same one? Also, are you sure the DPI is > the same (default is 75 dpi) and not getting set by some config file > maybe? > Otherwise I'm wondering if there's some undefined behaviour in there > somewhere, but I can't see anything obvious... > Theo Hi Theo, thanks for the thoughts. I'm definitely using ink_cov as inkcov does not report on ink usage but on which areas of the page include an ink (i.e. it takes no notice of density). That confused me quite a bit to begin with as the documentation for them is fairly thin. I hadn't thought about DPI but as far as I know I've done nothing to affect that as I've just tried running exactly the same command on the same file on both platforms, admittedly with a slightly different version number of GhostScript. I suppose it is possible that could affect the first issue I've mentioned above. However, I don't see how altering DPI surely could not make all ink coverage values the same when they are clearly not if you look at the document. -- ------------------------------------------------------------- Rob Hemmings Southport rhnews@dsl.pipex.com