| <<<Back 1 day (to 2017/01/01) | 20170102 |
brettk80 | Hi All | 01:02.41 |
camelopard2 | brettk80: Happy faxing! | 01:49.30 |
Robin_Watts | brettk80: OK, so gs command line options are case sensitive. | 10:34.11 |
| the compression option is "Compression", not "COMPRESSION". | 10:34.23 |
| Hence doing "-sDEVICE=tiffg4 -sCOMPRESSION=none", is the same as doing "-sDEVICE=tiffg4", so you get g4 compression, which is what you want fora f | 10:35.08 |
| for a fax. | 10:35.14 |
| Doing "-sDEVICE=tiffscaled -sCOMPRESSION=g4" is the same as doing "-sDEVICE=tiffscaled", which gives you the default tiffscaled compression - which is none, hence you get something unfaxable. | 10:36.07 |
| brettk80: Also, -r123X456 doesn't work afaict, you need -r123x456, I think. | 10:47.03 |
| -r123X456 is the same as -r123 | 10:47.13 |
| so the command you quote for your baseline image is producing a 204x204 fax image. | 10:47.31 |
| Also, what's the point of: -sColorConversionStrategy=Gray -dProcessColorModel=/DeviceGray ? | 10:50.46 |
| Yell when you're about and we can try some simple tests. | 10:50.59 |
brettk80 | Robin_Watts: I will try your recomendataions and report back. Thank you. | 16:30.32 |
Robin_Watts | brettk80: Do you have time now? | 16:31.13 |
brettk80 | Robin_Watts: Yes, a bit. I am going to try your downscale command and make the case adjustments | 16:31.40 |
Robin_Watts | Let's just try some really simple stuff. | 16:32.05 |
brettk80 | Robin_Watts: ok | 16:32.22 |
Robin_Watts | gs -sDEVICE=tiffg4 -o out.tif -r204x204 examples/tiger.pdf | 16:32.31 |
| Hopefully out.tif should be faxable. | 16:32.42 |
| Then try: | 16:32.44 |
brettk80 | 204x204 is not a standard fax resolution though. | 16:32.58 |
| 204x98 or 204x196 | 16:33.33 |
Robin_Watts | gs -sDEVICE=tiffg4 -o out.tif -r204x196 examples/tiger.pdf | 16:33.45 |
| then. | 16:33.46 |
| If that works, then we'll try: | 16:34.10 |
| gs -sDEVICE=tiffscaled -o out.tif -sCompression=g4 -r204x196 examples/tiger.pdf | 16:34.27 |
brettk80 | ok | 16:34.45 |
Robin_Watts | The only real difference that I can see between the files output by those two is that one uses "MINISBLACK" and one uses "MINISWHITE" | 16:35.30 |
brettk80 | waiting for the 1st to fax, but it seems like it will. | 16:35.49 |
| 1st test ok | 16:37.06 |
| testing #2 | 16:37.09 |
| #2 failed | 16:37.24 |
| fax_result_text: 'Far end cannot receive at the resolution of the image' | 16:37.33 |
Robin_Watts | Ok, so tiffinfo the two different files ? | 16:37.47 |
brettk80 | Robin_Watts: http://pastebin.com/8y9NhgJ2 | 16:38.27 |
Robin_Watts | gs -sDEVICE=tiffscaled -o out.tif -sCompression=g4 -r204x196 -dAdjustWidth=1 examples/tiger.pdf | 16:41.19 |
| That should force the tiffscaled output to match the width of the other one. | 16:41.32 |
brettk80 | Robin_Watts: seems to be faxing. | 16:42.44 |
Robin_Watts | Fab. | 16:42.51 |
brettk80 | the issue is if this is going to be problematic for each file if they vary.. | 16:43.05 |
| they should all be US letter, US legal or A4. | 16:43.17 |
Robin_Watts | So... we can try: | 16:43.17 |
| gs -sDEVICE=tiffscaled -o out.tif -sCompression=g4 -r612x588 -dDownScaleFactor=3 -dAdjustWidth=1 examples/tiger.pdf | 16:44.11 |
brettk80 | ok | 16:44.24 |
Robin_Watts | -dAdjustWidth=1 basically says "do some voodoo with the widths to suit fax devices" | 16:44.37 |
brettk80 | voodoo works for me. | 16:45.00 |
| the other test is still sending. I will test this one next. | 16:45.50 |
| Robin_Watts: Success | 16:50.24 |
Robin_Watts | Fab. | 16:50.31 |
brettk80 | Ill give it a go with A4 and some different docs. Super awesome. You need a tip jar :) | 16:50.47 |
| Robin_Watts: is it Ok to add -sPapersize? | 17:54.55 |
Robin_Watts | Sure. | 17:55.22 |
| https://ghostscript.com/doc/current/Devices.htm#TIFF | 17:55.46 |
| See the "-dAdjustWidth" bit on that page. | 17:55.57 |
brettk80 | ok... and -dAutoRotatePages=/PageByPage is proper still? | 17:56.11 |
Robin_Watts | Stuff near A4 is nobbled to 1728 and stuff near B4 is nobbled to 2048. | 17:56.25 |
| No idea. | 17:56.26 |
| If you don't understand it, don't use it. | 17:56.33 |
brettk80 | ok I will give it a try | 17:56.38 |
Robin_Watts | Cargo cult programming never ends well. | 17:56.41 |
brettk80 | lol.. | 17:57.11 |
| well we need to adjust if the page is landscape to portrait. We have another rendering engine that can do this as well, but GS would be ideal. Ill do some samples and check it out. | 17:57.57 |
Robin_Watts | A quick google through the docs suggests that -dAutoRotatePages=/PageByPage is still sane. | 18:00.46 |
ray_laptop | brettk80: the AutoRotatePages works by looking at the dominant text direction (which must be present as text and not just scanned characters) | 21:02.23 |
brettk80 | ray_laptop: is there a way to do it by page dimensions? | 21:03.03 |
ray_laptop | brettk80: -dFitPage will scale and rotate pages for the best fit to a given page format. Destination (output) page size can be in pixels with -gWWWxHHH or in points with -dDEVICEWIDTHPOINTS=__ -dDEVICEHEIGHTPOINTS=__ -dFIXEDMEDIA | 21:06.42 |
| -g implies -dFIXEDMEDIA | 21:06.51 |
| points are 1/72 inch | 21:07.03 |
brettk80 | so if I am using a papersize letter and its in landscape will dFitPage make it portrait? | 21:07.29 |
ray_laptop | brettk80: yes -sPAPERSIZE=letter -dFIXEDMEDIA -dFitPage will rotate landscape pages to portrait letter | 21:10.04 |
brettk80 | ray_laptop: thanks Ill give it a go. | 21:10.34 |
ray_laptop | brettk80: good luck. I may be around for a while yet if something doesn't quite work. Note that the direction of rotation prefers -90 | 21:11.27 |
| and there is no way (other than changing the "pdf_main.ps" PostScript code to alter that | 21:28.11 |
| but you can use a modified pdf_main.ps without having to recompile the executable | 21:28.34 |
brettk80 | ray_laptop: 90 would be upside down, so 45 if landscape seems like it would be the desired format.. | 21:29.41 |
ray_laptop | 45???? | 21:29.55 |
brettk80 | nm | 21:30.00 |
| mental error | 21:30.04 |
ray_laptop | 180 is upside down | 21:30.08 |
brettk80 | 90 is right | 21:30.08 |
| ya | 21:30.10 |
ray_laptop | right | 21:30.15 |
| maybe you were thinking about reflection about a line at that angle ? | 21:30.54 |
brettk80 | no I was just being stupid the first day back at work :) | 21:31.51 |
| multi-tasking and thinking math hurts. | 21:32.28 |
ray_laptop | good thing I'm not really working today. I get to be stupid Wednesday since I am traveling tomorrow | 21:32.33 |
brettk80 | I work all the time, but customers are back in the groove.. trying to get back into the swing after enjoying a vacation and sleeping in. | 21:33.09 |
| it has been slow, but tomorrow I am sure will be insane. (ugh) | 21:33.39 |
| traveling anywhere fun and warm? | 21:35.00 |
ray_laptop | well, warmer than St. Louis MO (where they are supposed to get a cold snap) to So Calif where the high today is about the same as STL | 21:36.29 |
brettk80 | I used to live in Chicago.. I feel your pain. | 21:36.59 |
ray_laptop | traveling back home after visiting my parents | 21:37.07 |
| I now live in So CA | 21:37.20 |
| (since 1976) | 21:37.29 |
brettk80 | Nice. My brother lives in San Diego, my dad moved to Hawaii and I'm in New Mexico... | 21:37.45 |
| Think dummy here needs to take the hint and go somewhere warm. | 21:38.00 |
ray_laptop | NM has parts that are warm, doesn't it? | 21:39.10 |
brettk80 | ABQ is kind of warm most winter, but it also has a lot of meth labs... lol. | 21:39.38 |
| Not my kind of town.. I live in Santa Fe near the mountains so we have skiing and cold - though not as bad as Chicago. | 21:40.01 |
ray_laptop | Do you have enough snow to ski recently? | 21:40.44 |
brettk80 | In the mountains yes. | 21:40.55 |
| Los Alamos and Taos too.. Taos is more known for skiing than Santa Fe, but we have it. | 21:41.26 |
| Mostly cheap to live, not too bad of a place, quiet, great food, historic, population less than 70k and higher elevation. Everything else sucks. | 21:42.00 |
| I travel a lot so I don't mind it.. Lived in mostly big cities most of life so it was a nice, temporary change. | 21:42.26 |
ray_laptop | My kids hope that the local (2hr drive) mountains will have snow when we get back for later this week | 21:42.29 |
brettk80 | lol - local | 21:42.39 |
| Mines about 25 minutes from my house. | 21:42.58 |
| are they old enough to drive? | 21:43.21 |
ray_laptop | yes (twins are 17) but still don't have their license | 21:44.18 |
brettk80 | might be a good time to consider that license... 4 hours of driving for snow fun is a big commitment. :) | 21:45.03 |
ray_laptop | brettk80: we went up to the mountains during Thanksgiving and it took us 6 hrs to get home -- bunch of snow noobs thinking they could get by without chains, and then others stopping in the road to put on chains when they got to where they couldn't go any further | 21:46.04 |
| it hadn't snowed, started at 2pm and by 4pm we had 4 inches | 21:46.32 |
camelopard | ray_laptop: I would like to request access to private test files. My school requires me to participate in practical training, and I would like to fix some bugs in ghostscript. However, many of these bugs involve test files which I do not have access to. Perhaps I could sign a NDA and get access to them? | 21:46.42 |
ray_laptop | it got 8 inches total in that storm | 21:46.58 |
brettk80 | I have a rover and I still drive with chains in the damn mountains. Plus people drive like idiots - I'm like "enjoy the cliff!" | 21:47.06 |
| ray_laptop: It's usually the tourists that think their little Prius can make it to the top. | 21:48.08 |
ray_laptop | camelopard: we can look to see if we can redact some of the files if you let us know which you are interested in. For an NDA, please contact our president, Miles Jones (miles dot jones at artifex dot com) and he will most likely be willing to get you set up | 21:49.16 |
| brettk80: yeah -- there was one such idiot that zoomed by in an F350 4x4 (on the wrong side of the road, as we were all inching along). About 20 minutes == 1/2 mile later, he was in the ditch | 21:50.35 |
camelopard | For instance, I would like the sample file for bug 695343. | 21:53.10 |
ray_laptop | camelopard: we would need the list of files/bugs you are interested in tackling in any case since we cannot give access to ALL private files. Go ahead and send the list of bugs you are interested in to me (ray dot johnston at artifex dot com) | 21:53.37 |
camelopard | Thank you, I will do so. | 21:54.34 |
ray_laptop | camelopard: strange. I didn't do a very good job reporting that one. No sample file attached, no command line. I'll fix that up now, but since it is fron 2014 it is probably already fiexed | 21:55.34 |
| Forward 1 day (to 2017/01/03)>>> | |