When importing a PDF with images, Photoshop CS6 adds faint outlines to the PDF image segments in the file. Prior versions of Photoshop render the PDF correctly. See the attached image for an example.
this is what I mean. It seems like a non-tiled image is also rendered wrong in PS CS6+. The artifacts look like a clipping error that appears on a plain image with no transparency flattening or effects rendered from PDF without depending on production software. Please see the following image – download it and zoom in at 400%.
You will see three horizontal edges running all over the image. You can recognize them best in the darker areas. These lines are not present in the original image or in PS CS5 renderings of the PDF file. And they are not about the well known white lines from tiled images. But I think it ́s about the same reason why they do appear.
Are you really sure this is not about a wrong-algorithm-caused rendering bug of the new engine?
Can you – or anybody else – confirm my rendering results?
This problem occurs also in PDF 1.7 files if you place 2 pictures side by side without a gap between them. This is not only a problem with the tiles produced by flattened transparency. If you render a PDF 1.7 with pictures in a row Photoshop CC produce a visible 1 pixel gap between them. In Photoshop CS4 the pictures fit together perfectly.
Are the new PDF 1.7 files also "bad" files, or is this effect caused by Photoshop?
My workaround is to open the PDF files in Illustrator and export them as jpeg or png. No visible white lines.
BOOM! Volker just hit this one out of the park. Absolute proof that the rasterizer in CS6 and CC *should not* show a space when those two photos are placed touching each other with no gap. Proof that this isn't a problem with tiles or flattening. Fix the flawed rasterizer in Photoshop CS6 and CC please. A failure of Photoshop and no other app.
This rendering bug even exist in Photoshop itself. I often wondered about these artifacts in different zoom levels. And I just tested it again. At 25% a zero pixel gap shows the layer underneath.
I wonder if in this specific case (displaying on a monitor in Photoshop) if that is just a visual display rendering bug, since it goes away at closer zoom levels. I'm cool with monitor display anomalies that don't print. I just can't have lines that actually print and cost me thousands of dollars in redos of my company's money that Adobe caused us.
No, that is something completely unrelated. It has to do with using downsampled images for previews at zoom levels below 100%. You can't downsample and maintain exact edges for different layers at all positions.
Actually, it is directly on topic. When two images are placed exactly next to each other with no gap, Photoshop CS6 and CC should not leave a single pixel gap between them when rasterized. Fine -- this is a *new bug* in Photoshop CS6 and CC unrelated to tiling!
And it *is* absolutely the same exact thing as two flattened tiles touching each other in a flattened PDF.
No, unfortunately it is not. The PDF tiles actually overlap by a single pixel. But that is still not enough to render them correctly at different resolutions (due to scaling and resampling).
And without checking the PDF contents to look at the exact coordinates specified, you cannot guarantee that abutting shapes or images should (or should not) render without a gap. What looks side by side might have a small gap or overlap.
Also, they may still have a gap in CS5 and earlier, but be blurred to show less obviously (due to the way that the old, slow antialiasing worked).
I produced two PDF versions from one InDesign Document, PDF 1.3 and 1.7 with CMYK transparency mode. And there is absolute no gap between those frames. Zero is zero or what else?
In the bottom row there is the same picture of the stars just in a new frame. And there is a red frame underneath all of them. The third frame in this row is just 100 k and set to overprint.
Honestly - which rendering is the best result?
A good solution must solve the problems of given circumstances.
Hola, cuando intento rasterizar (convertir un pdf a imagen), y el pdf esta acoplado las transparencias, la imagen resultante presenta rayas en los lugares donde se ha acoplado transparencia en el pdf.
There is a rendering-bug with PDF-files since photoshop CS 6 (Win 32 and 64 bit and Mac) ist launched: Opening and rendering a typical X3-PDF-file with transparency-reduced graphics, photoshop CS6 renders empty one-pixel-lines along the stitches of the sliced graphics. No bugfix and no update fixed the problem!
The problem is in the way the PDF files are written, with the images divided into tiles. They can't be rendered correctly except at the original resolution of the images. Please see the previous responses in this topic.
These white lines also occur in 1.7 PDF files between two images with NO GAP between them.
And even Adobe Acrobat PRO cannot save useable image files (no antialiasing for text for example.).
The only way is to export it from Illustrator as an .jpg and NOT as a .psd
It is a pity that Adobe as the inventor of PDF is not able to give us a proper way to convert PDF to image files.
Please re-assign this thread to someone else at Adobe customer support who can look at this topic with fresh eyes and an open mind. After proving to you time and time again that this is a Photoshop rendering issue, you just build a brick wall around you with your ears plugged and your eyes closed which isn't going to help make Photoshop better. I'm sure your sick and tired of listening to us, so for your benefit and ours, seriously, have *someone else* take a look at this topic please.
I have been following this thread for a while, checking in from time to time to see if there are any new developments. It is frustrating to see so many people being defiant to what you have to say.
I work with AutoCAD and print to PDF so i can import into photoshop for rendering. (I know there are rendering programs available through Autodesk, but still prefer to render with photshop.) Because of printing purely black & white line drawings from AutoCAD, the artifacts I experience appear as more of a halo or offset image as opposed to a white line.
I have been using CS5 as a workaround to this problem until I hear of a fix to the software. The artifacts that appear in the detailed areas of my line drawings are unbearable...HOWEVER, I do also experience the artifacts in CS5. They are something I have always noticed, but I have been able to remedy the problems with far less hassle in CS5 than in CS6. I just wanted to throw this out there, since so many people don't believe the artifacts were always there or even noticable. I will email you some example files in the form of original pdf, psd from CS5 & CS6, as well as corresponding jpgs.
I have been following this thread for a while, checking in from time to time to see if there are any new developments. It is frustrating to see so many people being defiant to what you have to say.
I work with AutoCAD and print to PDF so i can import into photoshop for rendering. (I know there are rendering programs available through Autodesk, but still prefer to render with photshop.) Because of printing purely black & white line drawings from AutoCAD, the artifacts I experience appear as more of a halo or offset image as opposed to a white line.
I have been using CS5 as a workaround to this problem until I hear of a fix to the software. The artifacts that appear in the detailed areas of my line drawings are unbearable...HOWEVER, I do also experience the artifacts in CS5. They are something I have always noticed, but I have been able to remedy the problems with far less hassle in CS5 than in CS6. I just wanted to throw this out there, since so many people don't believe the artifacts were always there or even noticable. I will email you some example files in the form of original pdf, psd from CS5 & CS6, as well as corresponding jpgs.
Thanks. We are still trying to get this solved, but it has been incredibly difficult to get the PDF folks responsible to sit down and talk about their mistake in tiling images and how to solve it.
Chris, never thougt about, that the way how PDF 1.3 is built isn't a mistake in the application but rather an inadequateness in the specification of PDF 1.3 or PostScript? Do you really know every detail of the Adobe graphic model, especially the older versions? And did the guys, who built the new rendering process in Photoshop concern about it? And if there is an inadequateness in the specification of PDF, don't you agree, that a rendering process, built from the same company has to be able to deal with it?
We're still working on the details: is it really a fault in the PDF/X spec, or just the implementations? But so far we can't get the parties together to discuss it.
262
Replies
AdChoices