I have tried nearly every library to convert pdf to svg, Following are the results of them
gs or ghostscript and imagemagick: The size gets multiplied by 100
pdf2svg and inkscape: The image on the top of the pdf is not at all accurate here are the links to the pdf and the svg.
PDF: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BxyQR1owWa_pcnhhSk5wQWJGMVk
SVG: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BxyQR1owWa_pVnhoLVlob1U2d1k
Please suggest me if I am missing something that needs to be done.
The Ghostscript SVG output device is seriously deprecated and no longer supported (or indeed built into the standard Ghostscript binary).
In any event, you need to be aware that PDF is a very rich graphics model, and it is simply not possible to reproduce every possible nuance of a PDF using the SVG graphics model, in particular fonts are a problem, but so is almost any kind of transparency. When that occurs Ghostscript will render the PDF to an image, and insert that into an SVG file. Almost certainly that's why you are seeing the SVG file being considerably larger than the PDF file. You should be able to use the -r switch to control the resolution of the rendering, allowing you to trade off quality for size.
Even if the whole file isn't converted to a bitmap, its possible that large portions of it are, or that the bitmap compression in SVG is less good than for PDF (or GS isn't taking advantage of all the possibilities). FWIW the PDF file uncompressed runs to > 4MB.
Related
I am Working on a small Image comparing script where the reference images are generated as SVGs and the compare images are PNGs.
I can transform the SVG files to PNG (using svglib and renderpm) but can´t specify the size I want them to be generated as(renderscale seems to cut of a part of the picture), but I need to get them to the same size for the compare functions and resizing the pngs nullifyes the whole purpose of vector graphics in itself. Any Ideas?
Regards a python noob
I'm trying to edit a vector graphics file from Freepik. The format is EPS and after installing both Inkscape and Ghostscript on Windows, I'm able to open the file with Inkscape. However, Inkscape introduces some weird artifacts (see lines and wrong colors in the picture below).
Side by side comparison, original vector (left) and SVG saved after opening the EPS file in Inkscape (right)
Is there a way to fix this issue?
It's a little difficult to tell, partly because this is a complex illustration and partly because the rendering is a little small. I'd suggest that the circular artefacts are caused by radial fills not being rendered completely.
This could simply be a rendering problem with Inkscape, or it could be that the radial fill has an Extend parameter which isn't being honoured. It could also be a problem calculating a clip.
It's not entirely obvious what you used to render the left hand image, is that Ghostscript ?
Generally I'd say this looks like an Inkscape bug and you should report it as such.
Edit
Reading through the Inkscape FAQ it seems that Inkscape uses SVG as its native format. That's going to mean that an awful lot of PostScript (and PDF) vector objects aren't going to be represented well. Shadings will either have to be rendered to an image or converted into a complex series of SVG primitives.
Following the link on 'How to open EPS files in Windows' from the FAQ suggests to me that EPS files are either rendered to an image or converted to PDF.
You could use Ghostscript to convert the EPS to PDF yourself, and then try loading the PDF into Inkscape to see if you get a better result. You can also open the PDF in, say, Acrobat to see if it looks OK there.
If the PDF looks fine in Acrobat, but not so good in Inkscape, then I'd say that's an Inkscape problem. If the PDF looks poor in Acrobat then that's a Ghostscript problem.
You can then report the problem as a bug to the appropriate site.
It seems that EPS has more capabilities than SVG and that's why some stuff looks weird when converted to PDF/SVG. Specifically, highlights in an EPS file are not properly rendered in an SVG file.
I checked the conversion from EPS to PDF via Ghostscript and the lines are already there, i.e. it's not an Inkscape bug.
Here's the original file to reproduce the problem:
https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/data-processing-factory-isometric-technology_8625296.htm
And here's what it looks like after converting it to PDF: The artifacts are not as noticeable on the PDF file, possibly because Ghostscript converts it with a higher DPI by default
My workaround to be able to edit the file (remove the background) was to:
open the EPS with Inkscape, ungroup the items
delete the background
export it as PNG
then use the PNG as a "mask" on GIMP to edit the JPG file that came together with the EPS.
I am building a small app with nodejs/expressjs. I made an upload wizard for GIF and JPG images... Depend on images' extension I will classify them into Animated Images or Normal Images...
GIF --> Animated Images
JPG --> Normal Images
But I got a problem, images in JPG can be animated. So how can I detect animated JPG images?
Demo animated JPG: http://picforest.net/pic/0237bbca82954e74902a4afba66df221
I think you can find out that information using EXIF information.
For instance, here's the EXIF info of the image that you have provided:
http://regex.info/exif.cgi?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.picforest.net%2Fupload%2F2015%2F17%2F0237bbca82954e74902a4afba66df221.jpg
It says that it's a GIF image.
There's a node module for exif called https://github.com/gomfunkel/node-exif. Perhaps that may help you out
As it was pointed in comments, there is no such thing as animated JPEGs (except this obscure proposal). Unfortunately this not mean that you can rely on image extension. Extension is just part of file name, it suggest file type, but not determines it. For example image you shared has .jpg extension, but in reality it's GIF and every major browser will treat it as one. In order to detect animated image you must inspect it's content. For example in case of GIF images you could check if first 6 bytes of file is GIF89a or GIF87a, but doing so you will know only that image is a GIF, not that image is an animated GIF. If you want to detect only animated GIFs you must check if they have multiple Image Descriptor Blocks, and it's a little bit more complicated.
It's also worth to mention that currently there are 3 supported by browsers image formats which could contain animation:
GIF - it's rather obvious;
APNG - it's supported by Firefox and Safari, other browsers displays these images as ordinary PNGs;
SVG - SMIL animations are supported by all major browsers except IE and Edge, and there are also CSS and ECMAScript animations.
If you want to detect first two types of animation you can use my node.js library - is-animated, it's rather simple to use:
const isAnimated = require('is-animated');
isAnimated(someBuffer); // -> true/false
Unfortunately currently it doesn't support detecting animated SVGs.
I want to make a responsive website. Part of that is to enhance my graphics. I have a few PNG flat icons that I would like to convert to SVG but I have no knowledge about Illustrator or any other SVG editor. I've tried an online service called vector magic, but the results are not what I need.
What is the best way to convert my images to SVG?
You should try Illustrator to vectorize your images (there is a function to do this). There will never be a perfect result, so you'll have to correct imperfections.
Here is a link that explains how to do this. You'll have then to save your image in "save as" and change the ai filename (for illustrator) to svg.
I've been doing some stuff in Illustrator and I have a problem with saving a project in to SVG file that I open in webbrowser, It just looks different.
And it hapens only in SVG, if I save it to PDF or PNG it looks how it should.
What am I doing wrong?
That's how it looks in Ai
That's how it looks in webbrowser
Here's a link to download rar file with .ai and .svg that I have.
Since all browsers render it the same way, it would seem likely that this is a bug in the AI SVG export filter.
To me it looks like you are applying a blend mode ("Overlay" perhaps?) to the white parts on top of the image. That effect ought to be reproducible using SVG filters, but perhaps AI's exporter doesn't support that yet.
If you are using an "odd" blend mode, try changing it, or reproducing the effect another way.
Individual pixel control needed in identical svg conversion is not possible. SVG creates only specific shapes. The Ai app conversion seems to use opacity to provide the color shades. You could probably tweek opacity and add some svg filters to improve the svg.
Print your design in a . pdf file instead of exporting it directly. Then open the printed .pdf back in Illustrator and export the .svg from this one, it shoud do the trick.