[poppler] pdftoppm vs. pdftocairo
Albert Astals Cid
aacid at kde.org
Tue Sep 20 01:46:52 PDT 2011
A Dilluns, 19 de setembre de 2011, Thomas Freitag vàreu escriure:
> Am 19.09.2011 11:32, schrieb Albert Astals Cid:
> > A Dilluns, 19 de setembre de 2011, Thomas Freitag vàreu escriure:
> >> Am 19.09.2011 11:01, schrieb Albert Astals Cid:
> >>> A Dilluns, 19 de setembre de 2011, Denny Reeh vàreu escriure:
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>> i'm using pdftoppm -png to convert a pdf to png for showing in web
> >>>> browsers. now, with the poppler release 0.17.3 pdftocairo was
> >>>> introduced.
> >>>> what are the differences between "pdftoppm -png" and "pdftocairo
> >>>> -png"
> >>>> ?
> >>> They use different rendering backends (poppler-splash vs
> >>> poppler-cairo)
> >> That's obviously for me. The more interesting questions for me is (I
> >> was
> >> suprised by pdftocairo, too):
> >> 1. If I want to produce a png output,
> >> a) which program produces the "correcter" output?
> >> b) which program is faster?
> >> Okay, nobody can probably answer this for all PDF. But are there any
> >> experiences?
> > It depends on the pdf you use.
> >> 2. What is with futur bugs in png output? File them to splash or file
> >> them to cairo?
> > If happens in both pdftoppm and pdftocairo is probably something not
> > render related so it's in the core, if happens only in one then it's
> > obvious where the bug is ;-)
> It's funny that you believe that if it happens in cairo and splash it is
> a core problem. The higher probability in my opinion is that we have a
> bug in splash AND cairo :-)
Nah, the higher probability is that we are not even parsing the necessary
fields for that to be implemented.
More information about the poppler