Bug 689880 - Incorrect rendering of colorant onto every separation.
Summary: Incorrect rendering of colorant onto every separation.
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Ghostscript
Classification: Unclassified
Component: X Display Driver (show other bugs)
Version: master
Hardware: PC Linux
: P4 normal
Assignee: Michael Vrhel
URL:
Keywords:
: 688952 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-06-02 10:42 UTC by Jason Giglio
Modified: 2009-01-07 09:40 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Customer:
Word Size: ---


Attachments
MySepTestFile.pdf (4.15 KB, application/pdf)
2008-08-27 09:44 UTC, Michael Vrhel
Details
AR7_MySepTestFile.png (5.17 KB, image/png)
2008-08-27 10:54 UTC, Ray Johnston
Details
GS_tiffsep_composited_MySepTestFile.tif (3.57 MB, image/tiff)
2008-08-27 11:06 UTC, Ray Johnston
Details
MySepTestFile.pdf (4.91 KB, application/pdf)
2008-08-27 22:06 UTC, Michael Vrhel
Details
AR_Output.jpg (46.75 KB, image/jpeg)
2008-08-27 22:22 UTC, Michael Vrhel
Details
SepOutput_RedSpot.tif (82.50 KB, image/tiff)
2008-08-27 22:25 UTC, Michael Vrhel
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jason Giglio 2008-06-02 10:42:57 UTC
Ghostscript tiffsep device (and possibly others) are rendering the attached PDF
incorrectly.  The "Varnish" colorant is duplicated onto every separation and is
overprinting it, obscuring everything.

Acrobat renders this properly, as does Creo Prinergy VPS output device.
Comment 1 Jason Giglio 2008-06-02 10:55:31 UTC
Created attachment 4074 [details]
bad raster output from tiffsep
Comment 2 Jason Giglio 2008-06-02 10:56:06 UTC
Created attachment 4075 [details]
PDF source file that gives the problem
Comment 3 Jason Giglio 2008-06-02 10:56:35 UTC
Comment on attachment 4075 [details]
PDF source file that gives the problem

Private-ing the attachments, proprietary data.
Comment 4 Alex Cherepanov 2008-06-02 18:26:25 UTC
This is a conflict between transparency and overprint features in Ghostscript.
Running the file with -dNOTRANSPARENCY fixes overprint but breaks the
transparency.
Comment 5 Jason Giglio 2008-06-09 02:15:23 UTC
Alex, is this an inherent problem, or a bug that can be fixed easily?
Comment 6 Jason Giglio 2008-08-12 06:48:50 UTC
Created attachment 4271 [details]
00540WBB200.pdf

Second PDF Source file
Comment 7 Jason Giglio 2008-08-12 06:49:42 UTC
Created attachment 4272 [details]
00540WBB200-tiffsep.pdf

tiffsep produced from file of same name
Comment 8 Michael Vrhel 2008-08-26 14:27:51 UTC
After taking a look at 00540WBB200.pdf I disagree with Alex's comment about the
problem being a conflict between transparency and overprint.  While that is a
complex issue, it does not seem to be the issue here.  The only effective way to
achieve proper softcopy preview of overprinting separations would be to have an
intermediate separation output device to which the separations are stored. 
These would then be propely "merged" for the soft copy preview, at the end.  I
am adding Ken onto this, since he and I had a discussion about this recently via
email. 

I am a little puzzled about the output of the tiffsep device for
00540WBB200.pdf.  The separations do not look exactly correct to me. For
example, the orange circle color is clear in the separation stuck in what is
called the Magenta separation but the "Western Beef" orange color is no where to
be found.  I will take a closer look.   It would be nice to have a smaller file.
 This thing has over 700 objects.
Comment 9 Ray Johnston 2008-08-26 17:05:14 UTC
Re Michael's comment:
"The only effective way to achieve proper softcopy preview of overprinting
separations would be to have an intermediate separation output device to which
the separations are stored."

The tiffsep device is supposed to be exactly this type of device -- the CMYK
composite image is composed from the separate (separations + CMYK) planes when
the page is emitted.

Errors on individual separations WILL be reflected in the CMYK composite output,
but since we use the 'tint transform' info from the Separation data in order to
perform the 'merge' of the separation layers onto the CMYK planes, problems in
the tint transform can also cause problems in the CMYK 'proof'.

Also the 'merge' is rather simplistic, assuming subtractive inks, so we make
no attempt (in tiffsep) to account for the 'opacity' or order of the inks.
Comment 10 Michael Vrhel 2008-08-26 17:18:07 UTC
Thanks Ray, I was wondering about that.  In this particular case the merged
image is way off.  The issue is likely in the merge process and the assumptions
that are made.  I will make a simple (smaller) example to play around with.
Comment 11 Michael Vrhel 2008-08-27 09:44:18 UTC
Created attachment 4331 [details]
MySepTestFile.pdf

A simple example of using spot colors, some with overprint and with some being
"transparent" inks (e.g. like an overcoat).  Our tiffsep device gives very odd
output for this file.
Comment 12 Ray Johnston 2008-08-27 10:54:12 UTC
Created attachment 4332 [details]
AR7_MySepTestFile.png

Screen capture from Acrobat Reader 7
Comment 13 Ray Johnston 2008-08-27 11:06:15 UTC
Created attachment 4333 [details]
GS_tiffsep_composited_MySepTestFile.tif

Ghostscript tiffsep composite output. The biggest difference I see is that the
"PANTONE Red 032 C" color is 'brighter' with GS. This does result in the
overprint
areas also being different. Adobe may have a different idea about what this
color
is supposed to be -- we are just using the tint transform info.

The "PANTONE 8723 C" color is also off slightly, and the area overprinted with
the "TOYO 0187" is noticeably different. 

Overall, however, I'm not sure I'd classify this as "very odd output".

Note that the view of the composited TIFF looks the same as using the display
device with -dDisplayFormat=16#a0800
Comment 14 Jason Giglio 2008-08-27 12:44:41 UTC
That is right, Adobe has a Pantone library that is probably more accurate than
the tint transforms PDF creators put into the file.

I don't believe anyone is nitpicking over color here, we are talking about
entire parts of the file not printing at all.
Comment 15 Jason Giglio 2008-08-27 12:48:41 UTC
I've confirmed the original issue for this bug is that the "Varnish" was
overprinting every other separation.

I will update the customer to the SVN version to confirm it's still present.
Comment 16 Ray Johnston 2008-08-27 13:26:15 UTC
The problem with the original file (attachment #2 [details]) still happens, but when I
run -dNOTRANSPARENCY seems to overprint correctly even though the 'Varnish'
separation still has the same content.

Seems that the transparency rendering isn't working with the overprint
compositor properly.

As far as I can tell, the MySepTestFile.pdf is a red herring, but possibly
adding transparency to it would show the error with a simple test file.
Comment 17 Michael Vrhel 2008-08-27 22:06:15 UTC
Created attachment 4334 [details]
MySepTestFile.pdf

OK.  I ignore all the above comments by me.  I had an issue with my Visual
Studio solution.  The issue is with overprint combined with transparency.  The
attached file suffers from the issue.  The white and yellow regions are set to
overprint.  With the presence of a cyan fill with opacity under these over
print fills we end up NOT doing overprint for those colors.  So, as Alex had
said, there is an issue when doing overprint with transparency.  Using this
example, I will see if I can figure out where things are going wrong.
Comment 18 Michael Vrhel 2008-08-27 22:22:46 UTC
Created attachment 4335 [details]
AR_Output.jpg

Here is the AR output, with overprint preview showing the use of overprint for
the white and yellow.
Comment 19 Michael Vrhel 2008-08-27 22:25:39 UTC
Created attachment 4336 [details]
SepOutput_RedSpot.tif

Here is the separation output image for the red spot color.  Note that
overprint of the yellow and white spot colors blew away part of red fill.
Comment 20 Michael Vrhel 2008-08-27 22:29:52 UTC
*** Bug 688952 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 21 Jason Giglio 2008-09-09 15:49:37 UTC
Has any progress been made?
Comment 22 Michael Vrhel 2008-09-09 20:31:59 UTC
I am working on transparency issues now and this is one of them.  Now that I
have a simple example, it should be straight forward to figure out the issue. 
Comment 23 Jason Giglio 2008-09-18 12:23:26 UTC
Customer again asked about this issue.  It's costing them hundreds of man hours
per week to work around this.
Comment 24 Michael Vrhel 2008-10-16 11:04:47 UTC
Looked into this and currently when there is a transparency present we install
the pdf14 device.  This device has no overprint support.  There are two possible
solutions.  One would be to add overprint support to the pdf14 device.  The
other would be to somehow make use of the overprint compositer gsovrc.c.  It
currently is not installed when we already have the pdf14 compositer.  When we
do -dNOTRANSPARENCY it is installed and overprint works properly.  My preference
would be to add overprint directly into the pdf14 code, likely by redefining the
rectfill when overprint occurs.  Looking for input on this....
Comment 25 Michael Vrhel 2009-01-07 09:40:51 UTC
Fixed with r9331.