Another interesting observation here is :
1. Took the page converted by the previous version and
compared it with the newer one using
swfextract and
then
swfdump.
2. It seems that the older one used to store image content
as a PNG while now the preferred choice is JPEG.
New
[-i] 3 Shapes: ID(s) 1, 2, 4
[-j] 1 JPEG: ID(s) 3
[-f] 1 Frame: ID(s) 0
Old
[-i] 3 Shapes: ID(s) 1, 2, 4
[-p] 1 PNG: ID(s) 3
[-f] 1 Frame: ID(s) 0
3. Dump from swfdump
New
[HEADER] File version: 9
[HEADER] File is zlib compressed. Ratio: 95%
[HEADER] File size: 691240
[HEADER] Frame rate: 0.250000
[HEADER] Frame count: 1
[HEADER] Movie width: 610.00
[HEADER] Movie height: 1004.00
[045] 4 FILEATTRIBUTES usenetwork as3
[009] 3 SETBACKGROUNDCOLOR (ff/ff/ff)
[020] 34 DEFINESHAPE3 defines id 0001
[01a] 7 PLACEOBJECT2 places id 0001 at depth
0001 (clip to 0003)
[020] 40 DEFINESHAPE3 defines id 0002
[01a] 5 PLACEOBJECT2 places id 0002 at depth
0002
[015] 691055 DEFINEBITSJPEG2 defines id 0003
[002] 40 DEFINESHAPE defines id 0004
[01a] 5 PLACEOBJECT2 places id 0004 at depth
0003
[001] 0 SHOWFRAME 1 (00:00:00,000)
[000] 0 END
Old
[HEADER] File version: 9
[HEADER] File is zlib compressed. Ratio: 98%
[HEADER] File size: 150826
[HEADER] Frame rate: 0.250000
[HEADER] Frame count: 1
[HEADER] Movie width: 610.00
[HEADER] Movie height: 1004.00
[309] 3 REFLEX
[045] 4 FILEATTRIBUTES
[009] 3 SETBACKGROUNDCOLOR (ff/ff/ff)
[020] 34 DEFINESHAPE3 defines id 0001
[01a] 7 PLACEOBJECT2 places id 0001 at depth
0001 (clip to 0003)
[020] 40 DEFINESHAPE3 defines id 0002
[01a] 5 PLACEOBJECT2 places id 0002 at depth
0002
[014] 150636 DEFINEBITSLOSSLESS defines id 0003
image 1272x2092 (8 bpp)
[002] 40 DEFINESHAPE defines id 0004
[01a] 5 PLACEOBJECT2 places id 0004 at depth
0003
[001] 0 SHOWFRAME 1 (00:00:00,000)
[000] 0 END
4. Could this be the reason for the size bloat (as PNG has a
better compression ratio compared to JPEG.) ?
5. As size of swf goes up there is substantial cost
increase in terms of storage and time (time required to
transmit and render these large sized pages onto a browser)
and this leads to overall lower performance in my
opinion.
6. I was wondering about the reason behind using jpeg as the
choice of storing image content instead of png.
7. Is there a way of forcing pdf2swf to use png in place of
jpeg ..?
Thnx,
Sameer
On 26/08/2010 11:04, Sameer Atre wrote:
Done - it worked !
Tried out with subpixels=1 and subpixels=2.
I found subpixels to be most effective; swf size came down from 3MB to about 700KB and rendering quality was preserved.
With subpixels 1 the size went down drastically to 200KB but quality deteriorated .
Cheers,
Sam
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 04:55:05PM +0530, Sameer Atre <address@hidden> wrote:
> I've been a vivid user of pdf2swf since 2 - 3 years.
> After upgrading to ver. 0.9.1 I find that source pdf's with image
> content get converted into very large sized swf's.
> Eg : In one instance the same pdf that used to result in swf's of size
> 500 KB has now become 3 MB !!
> But for pdfs with text content the reverse is seen. i.e swfs have become
> smaller. Am I missing something here please ?
Try downscaling the images- that might help:
pdf2swf -s subpixels=1 file.pdf -o file.swf
Matthias