[argyllcms] Re: OT: PDF frustration
- From: Kai-Uwe Behrmann <ku.b@xxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 21:00:11 +0200 (CEST)
Am 04.10.08, 11:44 -0700 schrieb Hal V. Engel:
> handle it at the application level (like today). The sad part about this is
> that ghostscript already has some CM capabilities thanks to Graeme and the
> ghostscript team is in the process of implementing complete support. A PDF
> to
> raster CUPS filter based on ghostscript instead of poppler would likely have
> had full CM support long before most users systems had been converted to a
> PDF
> based printing work flow and all of these systems would have had CM by
> default
> at that point as part of the printing system.
>
> The real question is what do we do about it? I have also been in contact
> with
> the printing community about this and there seems to be little interest in
> converting to ghostscript for either the CPD or the new CUPS pdftoraster
> filter. In addition poppler is widely used in various viewers such as Evince
> and Okular which means that the problem is more wide spread than just these
> new printing work flows. It could very well be a good idea to try to work
> with the poppler team to implement CM in the poppler library since this would
> correct this issue across a wider range of situations for users. For some
We have a real commitment from the Ghostscript community. So I would at
the moment not solely focus to a non standard conforming pice of code.
Some parts of the previous printing architecture discussion I must have
missed. About a final decision for Poppler I would have to (re-)read.
kind regards
Kai-Uwe Behrmann
--
developing for colour management
www.behrmann.name + www.oyranos.org
Other related posts:
