PDF-ShellTools > Ideas/Suggestions
Rasterizing PDFs?
RTT:
--- Quote from: nightslayer23 on October 24, 2017, 11:42:41 PM ---
--- Quote from: RTT on October 23, 2017, 11:50:12 PM ---
--- Quote from: nightslayer23 on October 23, 2017, 02:34:19 AM ---I managed to get a different file to work with the image extractor, but it is only letting me do a PNG?
--- End quote ---
What other format were you expecting? The tool extracts PDF image objects or the rasterization of the pages.
The above script just takes advantage of the tool page rasterization functionality, to create a rasterized PDF by merging all the generated page rasterization images files into a new PDF.
--- End quote ---
In the image extractor tool (not the new script) I don't have the option of PNG or JPG or TIF etc?
In the help file / webpage it says that should be an option..
--- End quote ---
These file formats (TIF is not included) are only provided when extracting PDF image objects, not whole pages rasterization that is limited to PNG.
A multi-page TIF option may be a good addition, to join all the extracted images in one image file. :-\
RTT:
--- Quote from: nightslayer23 on October 24, 2017, 11:44:10 PM ---This solution was actually much faster.. ? The other is literally just stuck displaying this:
> rasterizing O:\12010 COOKE & D\og\combined revised hyd-0001.pdf
Page 1/1
I'll leave ot be and see how long it takes but at this point it doesn't seem to want to spit out a file.
--- End quote ---
When you run the GUIed extract images tool on that file does it take that much to show/extract the page(s) image? The extract images tool relies on the system registered thumbnail handler (the shell extension the Windows shell uses to show the files thumbnails) to do the rasterization (the next release has a builtin one ;)). Do you know what thumbnail handler do you have installed (usually it is the provided by the application set as the default PDF reader, e.g. Acrobat, etc.
nightslayer23:
It never finished.. I need a DPI of about 300 for production printing.. is that just too high for this tool?
As I said, the new one you provided was much faster!
RTT:
--- Quote from: nightslayer23 on October 25, 2017, 07:21:24 AM ---It never finished.. I need a DPI of about 300 for production printing.. is that just too high for this tool?
--- End quote ---
Just tested and both scripts worked just fine with 300 DPI. You just need to edit the first line of the script to var RenderDPIs = 300;
--- Quote from: nightslayer23 on October 25, 2017, 07:21:24 AM ---As I said, the new one you provided was much faster!
--- End quote ---
If the first didn't finished, how can you know that? Something is failing in the first script call to the extract images tool, and the script is just waiting for the page rasterization image file to be created, something that is not happening. That's why I asked if you are able to manually use the extract image tool to rasterize the page to an external .png image file.
Anyway, if the second script is working, you have your problem covered. Or isn't producing what you need?
nightslayer23:
--- Quote from: RTT on October 26, 2017, 01:33:26 AM ---If the first didn't finished, how can you know that? Something is failing in the first script call to the extract images tool, and the script is just waiting for the page rasterization image file to be created, something that is not happening. That's why I asked if you are able to manually use the extract image tool to rasterize the page to an external .png image file.
Anyway, if the second script is working, you have your problem covered. Or isn't producing what you need?
--- End quote ---
sorry mate, yeah when I manually use the extract image tool it takes forever and doesn't output. it did for one file, which was just a simple A4 with an image on it, but anything more complicated and it doesn't seem to be doing much.
how long did it take for you using the first script? just because you said the second script would be slower it made me think something was wrong on my version if option 2 was (slow) but still much faster to get a result. was hoping that if there was indeed something wrong with my version, it might get fixed then it would be a much faster process.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version