![]() So my question here would be: does GhostScript inkcov device just counts the amount of pixels where a color is used, instead of also considering the amount of color used in a seperate pixel? Or am I overseeing something? Which are more or less the same as the APFill result. Which I used to count percentage pixel values using numpy and opencv in python: img = cv2.imread('test(Cyan).tif', 0) So I researched a bit further and used the Ghostscript tiffsep device to split the pdf in tif files per color seperation gs -o test.tif -sDEVICE=tiffsep -r300x300 testfile.pdf The Ghostscript result also seems wrong considering the test file is not a almost complete 'rich black' filled out document. Which is clearly not the same result as the ApFill one. Since APFill uses Ghostscript, I used the inkcov device for the following result: gs -o -sDEVICE=inkcov testfile.pdf ![]() I was looking into a getting the same result with open source methods. Searching the web we've come across APFill (trial version) which does the job: the test file gives following result: There is a difference in ink coverage result comparing three methods. Looking for a way to get the ink coverage from a pdf file to make quotes for printing jobs, I've come across a discrepancy I can't get my head around.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |