The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
This article is part of the LWN Grumpy Editor series. |
In theory, PDF viewers require little in the way of features. They should present the contents of a file in a quick and readable manner, allow navigation through the file, support printing of (parts of) a PDF file, etc. So it should not be that hard to get things right. One would think. In practice, your editor has found that the quality of the available PDF viewers varies significantly, both in terms of the interface they provide and how well they simply work.
There are two base platforms upon which PDF viewers are built. Some are front ends to the ghostscript utility. Ghostscript is a large, complex, and not entirely bug-free utility (it is also a crucial part of many Linux systems); its strengths and shortcomings will be reflected in any PDF viewers built on it. Most other viewers are built on xpdf. We'll start with the ghostscript-based viewers.
GNOME Ghostview (ggv)
The GNOME PDF viewer of long standing is ggv. Interestingly, this utility
seems to lack a web site, though there is an
online manual available which is only slightly out of date. The most
recent ggv release was in September of 2004, as part of the GNOME 2.8
package. It is a ghostscript-based viewer.
The ggv screen includes a left-hand side bar which allows instant access to any page in the document. Pages can also be marked, either directly with a mouse click or with buttons which mark all pages, or just the even or odd ones.
There is an option which can be used to print only the pages which have been marked. The "print" button in the menu bar, however, just dumps the entire file into the print subsystem without providing any opportunity for the user to redirect the job or cancel the operation entirely. Your editor, who prefers to fire up his monster duplexing laser printer for the rare large print job, gets grumpy indeed at utilities which throw output at the little inkjet printer without even asking. One should not be able to dump hundreds of pages onto a printer with a single click.
ggv does not take a whole lot of clues from the document regarding its orientation; a file which looks to be in portrait mode, but which has pages that are wider than they are tall, can be presented (and printed!) in the wrong orientation. The window size is always whatever the user used the last time around, and does not react to the orientation of the document. It is possible to ask ggv to zoom the document to fit within the window it has (a nice feature), but doing so disables the manual zoom operations (which is not). The scrollwheel may be used to move within a single page, but it will not scroll between pages, making it mostly useless.
Every now and then your editor encounters a document which ggv is unable to render. With such documents, the usual result is a blank window, which is not particularly edifying.
The visual quality of ggv's output is good; it runs ghostscript in a high-quality, antialiased mode. There is a reasonable set of configuration options for a number of aspects of ggv's operation, including how it uses ghostscript. If it were not for occasional reliability problems and a number of user interface issues, it would be a contender for this editor's favor.
kghostview
The KDE contribution in the PDF viewer arena is kghostview,
shipped as part of the kdegraphics package. Like ggv, kghostview uses
ghostscript as a back end; as a result, it tends to fail on the same PDF
files that confuse ggv. In many ways, kghostview comes across like ggv
with a KDE look; it provides many of the same features. There are some
differences, however.
Like ggv, kghostview provides a navigation bar on the left side; it also allows for the marking of articles. The kghostview version is different, however, in that it includes thumbnail images of each page. These thumbnails take space, making it more likely that the user will have to scroll the navigation bar. They are, however, very nice to have when one is looking for a specific page - the beginning of a section, say, or the end of an interminable table of contents. The thumbnails, alone, make kghostview a nicer tool to use than ggv.
kghostview has a friendlier interface for printing, allowing just about any behavior to be configured. Among other things, kghostview can do 2-up or 4-up printing, which can be useful for many documents. Printing can be restricted to marked pages. And, crucially, nothing is actually sent to the printer until the user has confirmed the operation.
Scrolling through the document with the scrollwheel is supported. If the user scrolls several pages, the application does the right thing - it does not take the time to render the pages in the middle. A single keystroke will fit the rendered document into the current window without disabling the regular zoom operations. If you are currently only viewing part of a page, you can drag a box around in a special thumbnail image to move to any part of that page.
In general, the interface provided by kghostview is as nice as any PDF viewer your editor has been able to find. It is clearly a tool which has received some serious thought - and use - by its developers.
xpdf
xpdf differs from the viewers we have seen thus far in that it is not based on ghostscript; instead, it contains its own PDF interpreter and rendering engine. A couple of the immediate consequences of that difference are (1) xpdf is rather faster than the![[xpdf]](https://static.lwn.net/images/ns/grumpy/xpdf-sm.png)
It is worth noting that, unlike the ghostscript-based viewers, xpdf (and others built on it) cannot handle PostScript files. That is a fundamental limitation, but, perhaps, also the source of xpdf's speed and robustness.
Compared to the GNOME and KDE viewers, xpdf is a minimalist tool. There are no menu bars, no fancy configuration widgets, and no navigation side bars. A small set of buttons at the bottom of the screen allows for movement through the file, including the ability to go to an absolute page number. A small menu gives a set of zoom options, including a couple of "fit to page" modes. Your editor notes that, when "fit to page" is enabled, the application responds poorly when its window is resized; it fails to skip intervening X resize events, and thus has to render the page numerous times. If you drag the corner of an xpdf window around for a few seconds, you can end up waiting for some time before it catches up.
The apparent simplicity of the xpdf interface hides a couple of vastly useful features. One of those is a "find in text" button, cleverly disguised as a pair of binoculars. If you have ever tried to find a particular string in a PDF file, this capability is priceless. Equally useful, if you are one of those strange people who writes articles about things found in PDF files, is the ability to cut and paste text from those files. Both of these functions silently fail if the file's text is in an image format - as is the case with many scanned legal documents. But, when they work, they are highly useful.
According to its web site, xpdf has the ability to work with encrypted PDF documents. Your editor, not having any such documents sitting around, was not able to try out that capability.
Navigation through PDF files is quick and straightforward, though it would be nice to have a side bar for going directly to pages. xpdf maintains a navigation history which can be useful for bouncing back and forth between specific pages. The scrollwheel works as one would expect. Printing support is minimal, but it has the features one really needs: the ability to print a (contiguous) subset of the file, and to specify which printer is to be used.
gpdf
gpdf is a GNOME-based PDF viewer built upon xpdf. As such, it shares the robustness and speed of xpdf. The gpdf developers, however, have added some new![[gpdf]](https://static.lwn.net/images/ns/grumpy/gpdf-sm.png)
gpdf provides a rather confusing toolbar at the top of the page. It is far from clear, for example, how the buttons marked "next" and "previous" differ from those marked "forward" and "back". There are two downward-pointing arrows; experimentation shows that one brings up a file history menu, while the other contains anything which doesn't fit in the toolbar at the current window width. There is a side bar in gpdf. It looks as if, someday, it is meant to contain page thumbnails, but, with gpdf 2.8.0, it renders pages as blank white rectangles with drop shadows. For whatever reason, it uses a two-column format, requiring the user to make the side bar very wide, or to do a bunch of horizontal scrolling.
gpdf uses the GNOME printing widget, so it provides a higher degree of control over printing than xpdf. It can put multiple PDF file pages onto each printed page. Better printing support is a definite improvement over xpdf.
On the other hand, gpdf lacks xpdf's scrollwheel support. It does not provide the "find in text" and "cut and paste" capabilities, which, it seems, are unique to xpdf. It is not clear why those features are missing; one might guess that gpdf forked the xpdf code base before they were added.
kpdf
The first impression one gets of kpdf is that it looks much like kghostview. It has essentially the same icon layout, and a very similar![[kpdf]](https://static.lwn.net/images/ns/grumpy/kpdf-sm.png)
kpdf is a relatively immature work. Its rendering is poor, by far the worst of any of the PDF viewers reviewed. Somehow, kpdf does not appear to understand font information well, leading to strange spacing between letters on both Fedora and Debian platforms. kpdf is speedy, however, and many of the important features are there.
It does appear that further work is being done with kpdf, at least if one goes by some screenshots linked to by KDE.News. The images suggest that the current development version supports multiple-page displays, string searches, and more. A future kpdf could well be be best PDF viewer of them all; the current version is too unfinished to be usable, however.
Concluding notes
This review has concerned itself with free PDF viewers. No review of this application space can really get away with ignoring Adobe Reader (acroread), however. This tool is certainly not free software, but there is a free-beer version available for x86 Linux systems. It is an old version; Adobe Reader 6 is not available for Linux. Even the older version, however, has its value. Occasionally a PDF file will come along that is so strange that no free viewer can cope with it. Acroread can be counted upon to work in such situations. It is, thus, one of exactly two proprietary programs on your editor's system.
Happily, free PDF viewers have come far enough along that having to fall back to acroread is a rare event.
The free PDF viewer state of the art has advanced in recent years, which is
a good thing. This is an area where, for quite some time, the free
alternatives lagged far behind. Now we have a wealth of viable programs to
choose from. Too many, perhaps. Your editor might like it better if the
development community would come together on, say, two viewers, and
cooperate on making those two the best they can be. The history of these
projects suggests that will not happen, however. There are two rendering
engines (ghostscript and xpdf), multiplied by two desktop systems.
Crossing those lines can be hard. We are likely to have a large set of
actively-developed PDF viewers for some time yet.
Posted Nov 29, 2004 22:58 UTC (Mon)
by brother_rat (subscriber, #1895)
[Link] (8 responses)
Maybe it only supports certain image formats or something? It also doesn't scale the thumbnails, so if a pdf has included unusually large thumbnails, then the sidebar takes up even more room.
Posted Nov 29, 2004 23:36 UTC (Mon)
by jwb (guest, #15467)
[Link] (7 responses)
gpdf is missing some key features of acroread. Page rotation is the one I miss most, although "find" is also pretty important. acroread does a better job at scaling bitmaps and line art than does gpdf, and I find it easier to read datasheets or schematics in the Adobe tool.
Posted Nov 29, 2004 23:48 UTC (Mon)
by jwb (guest, #15467)
[Link] (2 responses)
* Crashes in UTF-8 locales
Posted Nov 30, 2004 1:17 UTC (Tue)
by Ross (guest, #4065)
[Link]
Posted Dec 2, 2004 22:26 UTC (Thu)
by Dom2 (guest, #458)
[Link]
-Dom
Posted Nov 30, 2004 1:52 UTC (Tue)
by utidjian (guest, #444)
[Link] (3 responses)
-DU-...etc...
Posted Nov 30, 2004 3:04 UTC (Tue)
by jwb (guest, #15467)
[Link] (2 responses)
http://saturn5.com/~jwb/xpdf.png
There's something system-dependent about xpdf, because when I view that document at my office, the text is much worse. The letters of words are literally placed over each other. But even here you can see it's not as good as Acrobat.
Posted Nov 30, 2004 5:23 UTC (Tue)
by iabervon (subscriber, #722)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Nov 30, 2004 7:40 UTC (Tue)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
Posted Nov 29, 2004 23:28 UTC (Mon)
by Zenith (guest, #24899)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Nov 30, 2004 10:41 UTC (Tue)
by pjm (guest, #2080)
[Link]
Posted Nov 30, 2004 0:06 UTC (Tue)
by gilb (subscriber, #11728)
[Link]
Posted Nov 30, 2004 1:18 UTC (Tue)
by zooko (guest, #2589)
[Link]
Posted Nov 30, 2004 1:38 UTC (Tue)
by clint (subscriber, #7076)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Nov 30, 2004 3:54 UTC (Tue)
by elanthis (guest, #6227)
[Link]
No that I have found.
Posted Nov 30, 2004 1:56 UTC (Tue)
by dns (subscriber, #4239)
[Link] (2 responses)
Ghostscript itself has come a long way over the past few years.
The latest AFPL version is 8.33, which is actually a beta for
What version of ghostscript are you using on your machine?
Posted Nov 30, 2004 12:33 UTC (Tue)
by jayavarman (guest, #19600)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Nov 30, 2004 22:07 UTC (Tue)
by amaze (guest, #21978)
[Link]
Posted Nov 30, 2004 2:23 UTC (Tue)
by rlb (subscriber, #9072)
[Link] (1 responses)
(For Debian users -- apt-get install gv)
Posted Nov 30, 2004 2:35 UTC (Tue)
by Ross (guest, #4065)
[Link]
Is the searching function just not possible for programs using gs as a
Posted Nov 30, 2004 3:09 UTC (Tue)
by larryr (guest, #4030)
[Link] (1 responses)
I hate those postscript viewers so much more than xpdf; lately I have been just converting PostScript to pdf, using something like:
Larry
Posted Nov 30, 2004 4:55 UTC (Tue)
by stevenj (guest, #421)
[Link] (9 responses)
I don't suppose one of the free viewers above has such a feature, and I just missed it somehow? (Yes, I know I one do wonders with ImageMagick, but graphical selection of a region to export is awfully nice.)
Posted Nov 30, 2004 6:32 UTC (Tue)
by larryr (guest, #4030)
[Link] (2 responses)
I dont know if its a decent answer, but I sometimes use "convert" from ImageMagick to produce a bitmap image file for each page, something like
Its obscenely resource intensive, but when its done I can just edit the jpg file using whatever bitmap editor. There is a "pdfimages" program with xpdf, but it has often not produced very useful output for me.
Larry
Posted Nov 30, 2004 20:53 UTC (Tue)
by smurf (subscriber, #17840)
[Link] (1 responses)
PNG is a better choice. By far.
Posted Dec 1, 2004 4:17 UTC (Wed)
by Ross (guest, #4065)
[Link]
Posted Nov 30, 2004 10:31 UTC (Tue)
by pjm (guest, #2080)
[Link] (5 responses)
Posted Nov 30, 2004 16:45 UTC (Tue)
by stevenj (guest, #421)
[Link] (4 responses)
(Yes, you can export a whole page image, then open in the GIMP or whatever and copy/save the selection. Anything is possible with enough effort; that's not what I was asking.)
Sigh...apparently, this is another feature of Acrobat that is not yet implemented in free PDF viewers. (I wish the review had gone further beyond the "Can it open and print a PDF file?" level. The problem with many of these "grumpy editor" reviews is that they set the bar incredibly low compared to available proprietary software. I use, write, and love free software, but let's not close our eyes to where it is still deficient — in short, the grumpy editor is not grumpy enough for my tastes.)
Posted Nov 30, 2004 17:40 UTC (Tue)
by larryr (guest, #4030)
[Link]
I personally do not consider selecting portions of images for copy/paste an important feature of a PDF viewer, or a web browser; I do think it is important to have software which can read PDF and produce image data which can be read by an image viewer which provides for selecting portions of images for copy/paste.
Larry
Posted Nov 30, 2004 23:11 UTC (Tue)
by grantingram (guest, #18390)
[Link] (2 responses)
Of course one can get around it - a more direct way than converting the entire file might be to take a screenshot and edit that in the GIMP - handy if you have a twenty page document.
I'm sure there must be some bit of software that will take bitmaps of arbitary bits of screen though...
Posted Nov 30, 2004 23:43 UTC (Tue)
by stevenj (guest, #421)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Dec 21, 2004 2:01 UTC (Tue)
by freeid (guest, #22401)
[Link]
Another annoying thing is that you still can't paste an image copied from acroread into Gimp. (In Unix that is, it allegedly works in Windows.) It works with Xpaint though.
Posted Nov 30, 2004 5:20 UTC (Tue)
by ncm (guest, #165)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Nov 30, 2004 7:19 UTC (Tue)
by pgm (guest, #13851)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Nov 30, 2004 11:24 UTC (Tue)
by pontus (guest, #3701)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Dec 1, 2004 10:57 UTC (Wed)
by pgm (guest, #13851)
[Link]
Posted Dec 9, 2004 12:40 UTC (Thu)
by kmself (guest, #11565)
[Link]
Posted Nov 30, 2004 10:12 UTC (Tue)
by alanjwylie (subscriber, #4794)
[Link]
[1] http://www-zeuthen.desy.de/~friebel/unix/lesspipe.html
Posted Nov 30, 2004 13:27 UTC (Tue)
by tzafrir (subscriber, #11501)
[Link]
Posted Nov 30, 2004 19:21 UTC (Tue)
by jeskritt (guest, #4092)
[Link] (2 responses)
I have a Mac G4, a x86 Linux box and a SPARC Solaris machine on my desk at work. Even using Adobe Acrobat reader for each platform I can't print some PDFs. They print without error, but nothing comes out of the printer. I can print to postscript and dump the PS to the print and still nothing comes out. If I print the PDF to a PS file and use ps2ps I get PS stack errors.
I find the only way for me to print these files (other than finding someone with a windows machine to do it for me) is to use OS X's Preview program. It prints them no problem. I can also use it to print to PDF and those PDFs will print on non-windows machines.
Posted Dec 21, 2004 1:22 UTC (Tue)
by freeid (guest, #22401)
[Link]
Posted Dec 22, 2004 7:16 UTC (Wed)
by barrygould (guest, #4774)
[Link]
(Or, you can use a PCL driver instead of PostScript)
Barry
Posted Nov 30, 2004 19:32 UTC (Tue)
by tjc (guest, #137)
[Link] (1 responses)
Another possibility is that they were removed because someone in the GNOME project thought they might confuse novice users.
Posted Dec 2, 2004 5:54 UTC (Thu)
by sbergman27 (guest, #10767)
[Link]
BTW, I really like this series of articles.
Posted Dec 1, 2004 4:02 UTC (Wed)
by yodermk (subscriber, #3803)
[Link] (5 responses)
So far, Acroread is the only reader I've used that can properly display translucent objects created in Scribus.
Related to PDFs, does anyone know of a Free library that can generate PDFs based on other PDFs? I want to write a Python program to convert a Gnumeric table of stock/option trades into a Schedule D tax form. I need a library that can import a page or two from the form, write in the appropriate values, and spit out another PDF. So far, no Free library I've seen can import PDF pages. Thanks!
Posted Dec 1, 2004 12:10 UTC (Wed)
by evgeny (subscriber, #774)
[Link]
Posted Dec 1, 2004 17:42 UTC (Wed)
by DrBubba (guest, #5588)
[Link]
Posted Dec 2, 2004 9:51 UTC (Thu)
by tekNico (subscriber, #22)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Dec 2, 2004 15:53 UTC (Thu)
by kfiles (guest, #11628)
[Link]
And pdftk itself uses the handy Java iText libraries for actual PDF composition/decomposition. iText can specifically address the author's desire to modify PDF content inline. And if you don't want to use run-time Java interpreting, you can copy pdftk's technique of precompiling to native code using gjc.
See:
--kirby
Posted Dec 3, 2004 3:53 UTC (Fri)
by liamh (guest, #4872)
[Link]
Posted Dec 1, 2004 7:34 UTC (Wed)
by anselm (subscriber, #2796)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Dec 1, 2004 14:28 UTC (Wed)
by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458)
[Link]
Posted Dec 14, 2004 13:47 UTC (Tue)
by fjorba (guest, #6175)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Feb 6, 2009 12:55 UTC (Fri)
by mat (guest, #56532)
[Link]
Posted Dec 2, 2004 19:02 UTC (Thu)
by d.e.cox (guest, #3912)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Nov 19, 2005 13:37 UTC (Sat)
by chm (guest, #33959)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 5, 2008 21:47 UTC (Thu)
by edinburcc (guest, #52418)
[Link]
Posted Jul 8, 2008 8:27 UTC (Tue)
by okeydoke (guest, #46751)
[Link]
Posted Dec 2, 2004 22:23 UTC (Thu)
by pimlott (guest, #1535)
[Link]
Speaking of find, Google can search PostScript; why can't we?
Posted Dec 9, 2004 4:19 UTC (Thu)
by bryn (guest, #1482)
[Link]
One ability which appears to be lacking in anything other than acroread is to edit forms. This is useful, for instance, for filling in details in a PDF invoice. Alas, acroread doesn't allow the edited document to be saved.
I would dearly like to see a form entry within xpdf, but it would be a true achievement to include a save changes option as well.
Posted Dec 9, 2004 10:19 UTC (Thu)
by boson (guest, #23807)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Dec 9, 2004 14:25 UTC (Thu)
by forthy (guest, #1525)
[Link]
Posted Dec 10, 2004 12:08 UTC (Fri)
by rabnud (guest, #2839)
[Link] (1 responses)
Any possibility of finding and reviewing programs that can create and edit PDFs?
Posted Jan 28, 2005 19:29 UTC (Fri)
by malex (guest, #15692)
[Link]
Posted Dec 16, 2004 17:04 UTC (Thu)
by testerus (guest, #19974)
[Link]
Posted Feb 3, 2005 10:08 UTC (Thu)
by slef (guest, #14720)
[Link]
Posted Feb 7, 2005 3:17 UTC (Mon)
by aarchiba (guest, #27728)
[Link]
A good viewer to compare against is djview (which cannot, of course, read PDF files) --- it has decent human-factors design (aided by the underlying file format).
Posted Feb 18, 2005 10:52 UTC (Fri)
by pdfdeveloper (guest, #27978)
[Link]
Posted Apr 14, 2005 16:32 UTC (Thu)
by pascal_eberhard (guest, #29261)
[Link]
You may want to have a try...
Evince
From the web site: What is Evince?
Evince is a document viewer for multiple document formats like pdf, postscript, and many others. The goal of evince is to replace the multiple document viewers that exist on the GNOME Desktop, like ggv, gpdf, and xpdf with a single simple application.
Posted Aug 17, 2006 22:34 UTC (Thu)
by Thomas (subscriber, #39963)
[Link]
gpdf can display page thumbnails, but I think support might be a bit flaky.The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
xpdf has its uses. I have actually whipped up a web application for use around the office. The user uploads an encrypted, unprintable, copy-protected, or otherwise broken PDF file, and, after a round-trip through xpdf, the application gives you back something useful. But other than such automated uses, I find it infuriating. Many times the on-screen kerning in xpdf is just horrible where it looks fine in Acrobat Reader (example: http://www.analog.com/UploadedFiles/Technical_Articles/49... )The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
Well hell, it almost sounds like I was bashing gpdf there. Let me balance it out with the short list of acroread annoyances:The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
* Crashes if Find feature finds nothing
* Crashes if Help->About Acrobat Reader chosen
* Ctrl-w can't close the last window
* Won't open the same document more than once
* Motif
* Can get confused and put the input focus into a black hole (see: Motif)
* Interacts very badly with Motif clipboard users (see: Motif)
* Gigantic executable (see: Motif)
* Font rendering configured separately from system configuration
It's been a long time since I used it but I also remember horrible colorThe Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
inversion problems when part of the window was obscured and had to be
redrawn. This may have only happened on 15 and 16 bpp displays but it may
have been any TrueColor visual.
Sadly, xpdf also joined the motif-me-harder gang since v2. :-(The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
Strange, I find xpdf to have better rendering on that document than acroread. xpdf-3.00 versus acroread-5.0.9 on Fedora Core 3.The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
Interesting. I find the typography in xpdf to be pretty poor. In the following screenshot, xpdf is on top and acroread is below. Taken on Debian unstable x86:The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
That seems to be an issue of the fonts that the programs have access to. It looks like xpdf doesn't have the original font, and is using a different one with different metrics instead, which causes the document's typography to be messed up. Notice that the fonts don't even really have the same aspect ratio (xpdf is using a much squarer font). Acroread probably has the fonts that people actually use stashed away somewhere, so it can render documents more nicely.The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
If you want decent rendering out of xpdf, you simply have to point it at GhostScript's Type 1 fonts. I've also pointed it at all Type 1 fonts I own, including all the TeX Type 1 fonts; there really are some documents out there that use (e.g.) non-embedded Computer Modern...The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
xpdf also supports (this is not mentioned?) showing a table of contents in the left-hand side of the window. The small box in the lower left corner of the window can be dragged right, opening a window that contains the TOC for the document. This should usually appear by itself when the PDFs have these. Not having a navigation side bar is bearable, and I find xpdf to be the best of the PDF-viewers I've tried so far.The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
I do agree though, that kpdf shows promise and they seem to be hard at work to make it the premier free PDF-viewer, underlined by their logo contest.
xpdf has something arguably better: a keyboard shortcut. `g 69 RET' takes you to page 69, similar to the g key in xdvi.navigation bar in xpdf?
xpdf does work with encrypted documents (at least v 3.00 does). I like it much better than any of the ghostview based alternatives.The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
In Debian, ggv (which is called gnome-gv there) is no longer considered a PDF viewer. It is The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
supposed to be used only for PS. If you load a PDF with it then (last I checked) it will load, but
will be rendered in some nearly unreadable pixellated font.
This article lacks information about support for PDF "fillable forms"; are they supported by anything but acroread?The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
No.The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
When talking about the PDF viewers that depend on GhostscriptThe Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
for rendering the pages, it is important to take note of the
particular version of Ghostscript that is being invoked.
Colour, font-rendering, and general PDF-handling have all advanced.
soon-to-be-released 8.50. The somewhat older but recently
updated GPL version is also a far cry from a year or so ago.
The problem here (in Debian) is when you have CUPS installed which forces you to have as the default GS the ESP version (7.07) even if you have the latest GNU GS. It's a shame...The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
Try setting your gnome-gv Interpreter (Edit -> PostScript Viewer Preferences, Ghostscript -> Interpreter) to gs-esp (or gs-afpl, depends on which one you've got installed). It's not ideal, but it works for ggv, at least.The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
I still find plain gv to be more useful than ggv. Though its controls aren't "standard", I find that having space and backspace page forward and backward, and having 'q' quit is quite convenient, and much quicker than the ggv equivalents.Have you tried gv?
That's what I use as well. I thought I had a "gv" alias for ghostview whichHave you tried gv?
is how I discovered the command. It has worked reliably for me for years,
though some PDFs do give it indigestion and some scanned documents are
difficult to read due to the way it does bitmap scaling.
backend? Does anyone know if there any plans to fix this shortcoming?
PostScript Viewer
gs -q -dQUIET -dNOPAUSE -dSAFER -dBATCH -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -sOutputFile=out.pdf in.ps
One feature of Acrobat Reader on other platforms that I have missed in free PDF viewers is the ability to copy bitmap images from arbitrary rectangular selections. This is invaluable, for example, when you want to make a presentation that incorporates some figure from a PDF publication (properly cited, of course!).
extracting bitmap images from selections?
extracting bitmap images from selections?
convert file.pdf file.jpg
Ouch. Please, NEVER convert something that is not a continuous-tone picture to JPEG. You will get compression artefacts and it will be either bloated or ugly.extracting bitmap images from selections?
Not to mention that JPEG isn't appropriate for editing because the lossyextracting bitmap images from selections?
compression artifacts build up every open-edit-save iteration, often at a
superlinear rate. Yes, there are such things a lossless JPEGs but they take
as much space as any other losslesss format and few programs can be told to
write them.
man pdfimagesextracting bitmap images from selections?
As I said, I'm aware of command-line utilities like ImageMagick, and pdfimages falls into the same boat. They have their uses, but for extracting individual portions of pages are nowhere near as convenient as being able to directly extract a graphical selection from the PDF viewer.
extracting bitmap images from selections?
extracting bitmap images from selections?
I agree with stevenj the ability to extract pictures from PDF files is extremely useful - I spend a lot of time reading PDFs at the moment and being able to get at images from them is quite handy. extracting bitmap images from selections?
Screenshots are not quite the same, however, because they are limited by the screen size and resolution, whereas an image-capture tool in the PDF viewer can use a higher resolution.extracting bitmap images from selections?
Silly enough I noticed that if you copy graphics from Acrobat Reader the bitmap will only be in the resolution you are viewing it. You can print the selection to a Postscript file though and thus get the full resolution. But it doesn't seem to work all the time...extracting bitmap images from selections?
The main reason I find myself using xpdf is that in gv too many documents are displayed with much of the page chopped off. This shows up most frequently with typical city transit maps, and with converted presentation slides. The slides are "landscape", but gv insists on a "portrait" layout, so the bottom part of the window is blank, and the right side of the slide is inaccessible.Chopped pages
A major reason (The Reason?) for using Acroread for me is the "Bookmarks" feature. Navigation by thumbnail or page icon just isn't the same as clicking on a named heading and going straight to the spot. Particularly as my company now generates bookmarked docs using the excellent extendedPDF plugin to OOo. Is there any reason why the free viewers don't support bookmarks - is it a legal hurdle, or is it a matter of shortage of round-to-its?Bookmarks
The feature you want is in xpdf. Click the square in the bottom left corner and drag to reveal the bookmarks panel. I love extendedPDF too :)Bookmarks
So it is!. Thanks very much.Bookmarks
If it's just a matter of rotating the image, the keys 7, 8, 9, and 0 will give you portrait, landscape, upside-down, and seascape, respectively in gv. Also selecting 'BBox' in the papersize dialog generally fits the display to the logical papersize also, if the sizing is nonstandard. Try these.Rotating pages
Don't forget good old less(1). With $LESSOPEN set to lesspipe[1] andThe Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
pdftotext from the xpdf package installed , it's easy to take a quick look
at the text contents of PDF files.
What versions of Ghostscript and of XPDF were used in this review? What distro? (in case of some important distro-specific patches)versions of gs and xpdf
I find that a number of PDFs fail to print on non-windows machines, particularly with technical papers. I think it's from using the PDF writer from with in MS Office. I don't have any proof though. Printing issues with some PDFs
When I've had this problem I've always been able to circumvent it by either choosing another Posctscript level from Acrobat Reader or using Ghostscript's pdf2ps utility.Printing issues with some PDFs
I've had problems like that (on Windows) with a Lexmark Optra R laser... solution was to get a new PostScript ROM from Lexmark.Printing issues with some PDFs
The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
> On the other hand, gpdf lacks xpdf's scrollwheel support. It does not
> provide the "find in text" and "cut and paste" capabilities, which,
> it seems, are unique to xpdf. It is not clear why those features are
> missing; one might guess that gpdf forked the xpdf code base before
> they were added.
I don't think so. Until not too terribly long ago, one of the missing features was "Print". Yes, I 'm serious. I suspect the project could use a few more developers.The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
xpdf is definitely a great program; I use it most of the time.PDF viewers ... PDF editing libraries?
Consider Panda/Pandaflex (http://www.stillhq.com/cgi-bin/blosxom/panda/). If Java is acceptable, see pdfbox (http://www.pdfbox.org/) and pjx (http://www.etymon.com/epub.html).PDF viewers ... PDF editing libraries?
perl has the PDF::API2 bundle that I've used to break a series of pdf files down into pages and then reassemble them into a single document. This will require a little bit of coding on your part and the documentation with the module is a little bit spotty.PDF viewers ... PDF editing libraries?
PDF viewers ... PDF editing libraries?
$ apt-cache show pdftk
...
If PDF is electronic paper, then pdftk is an electronic stapler-remover,
hole-punch, binder, secret-decoder-ring, and X-Ray-glasses. Pdftk is a
simple tool for doing everyday things with PDF documents. Keep one in the
top drawer of your desktop and use it to:
- Merge PDF documents
- Split PDF pages into a new document
- Decrypt input as necessary (password required)
- Encrypt output as desired
- Burst a PDF document into single pages
- Report PDF on metrics, including metadata and bookmarks
- Uncompress and re-compress page streams
- Repair corrupted PDF (where possible)
Author: Sid Steward <ssteward@accesspdf.com>
Homepage: http://www.accesspdf.com/pdftk
PDF viewers ... PDF editing libraries?
> $ apt-cache show pdftk
> ...
> If PDF is electronic paper, then pdftk is an electronic stapler-remover,
> hole-punch, binder, secret-decoder-ring, and X-Ray-glasses. Pdftk is a
> simple tool for doing everyday things with PDF documents.
http://www.lowagie.com/iText/
I had good luck with "Mad Builder PDF Assembler"PDF viewers ... PDF editing libraries?
http://thierry.schmit.free.fr/dev/mbtPdfAsm/enMbtPdfAsm2....
It took a little while to figure out - you have to create an assembly/disassembly script - but it seems quite versatile.
Do any of the free PDF viewers support a full-screen mode the way Acrobat Full-screen mode?
Reader does? I find myself using this rather a lot for presentations.
Extra credit if the viewer in question can be remote-controlled from
another application.
Anselm
xpdf -fullscreen somepresentation.pdfFull-screen mode?
In addition to -fullscreen, please take a look at the man page, section Remote Server Mode. It allows you to load a file, go to a page, raise, quit, etc.Full-screen mode?
Full-screen mode?
Alt-f works as well.
I haven't found a free means to annotate (add little yellow comment boxes) to PDFs. I've used this feature of Adobe's products quite a bit, and it looks to be one of the major improvements in acrobat 7. Anyone know if this kind of capability is in the pipeline of the free readers xpdf, ggv, etc?Free means to annotate (comment) a PDF?
There's an open source java program "jarnal", which primarily serves as a scratch book device for "tablet" computers. However, it allows you to put a pdf-file in the background, add some "sticky notes" via traditional keyboard and save the whole thing back in different formats:Free means to annotate (comment) a PDF?
http://www.dklevine.com/general/software/tc1000/jarnal.htm
This might provide some of the functionality that you're looking for. However, it's been quite a while since you've posted. If you've already found something better, please let us know. Besides, the annotation feature for pdf seems quite important to convince people getting rid of inappropriate formats (like the .doc-thing) in collaborative writing efforts. Linux pdf application developers should seriously consider the "sticky note" feature.
For a downloadable program, there is Foxit Reader or you can do it via the browser at A.nnotate.com where you just upload the file and start adding comments.
Both have free and commercial versions, but I'm not sure of the details.
You can do it with Foxit or A.nnotate
Plenty of tools nowadays:
Okular in kde4 does a good job, although the annotations don't show up in other pdf readers unless you print it to a pdf.
xournal Lets you be VERY creative in how you annotate - you can do freehand drawings, etc. on it. Perfect for tablet PCs.
There is also
Jarnal,
Gournal, and
NoteLab
but I haven't tried them.
Openoffice will have Sun PDF Import extension (SPI).
You can also use PDFXchange through wine.
PDFedit, is for advanced users, and is said to be "the most reliable PDF editor for the GNU/Linux desktop."
Free means to annotate (comment) a PDF?
xpdf has more than its share of imperfections (in rendering quality, performance, and user interface), but I don't see how you could give up find and copy for everyday use. I mean, this is digital information! That's why I download PDF in preference to PostScript, even though the PostScript version (in gv) is typically better in every other way. Oh, and xpdf has some handy keyboard shortcuts, including vi motion keys!Find and copy are indispensable
PDF is, in my view, vastly superior to Word as a format in which to send documents. Many web-sites provide downloadable documents in both Word and PDF documents.PDF forms
I am surprised that Grumpy Editor didn't notice (or am I getting functionally illiterate?) that xpdf supports hyperlinks in PDF files, while gv/ggv don't. This is a major issue in, for example, PDF presentations.The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
Yes, using a PostScript viewer really doesn't count as PDF reader. Links The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
and bookmarks are important features of PDF. Hm, come to think, the way
LaTeX generates bookmarks and links through ps2pdf, you should be able to
have a PostScript viewer that has exactly the same features. Even features
like the yellow notes or annotations within the text (Acrobat) should be
possible with free software (and PostScript - at least the annotations,
not the yellow notes).
Things that also are important is how good it handles Type3 fonts. LaTeX
PDFs often come with these fonts (though cm-super provides all the EC
fonts). Acroread does a very poor job on these fonts, Ghostscript and xpdf
are much better. xpdf however has troubles with lineart graphics (no
antialiasing, looks very ugly).
The next on my list of issues is CJK handling. Acroread can only handle
CJK well in the 6.x version (i.e. not on Linux - and you have to
deliberately download the Chinese version), xpdf does it quite well, and
Ghostscript, too (once you have the -cjk tools installed). Why is this
important? Well, pdfs come from all over the world, and these Chinese guys
manage to put at least the one odd sign into their PDF. If this causes the
page to be rendered totally white (like in Acroread 5 or Ghostscript
without -cjk), it's not acceptable.
Nice review, thanks!The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
rabnud, Programs that create PDF
The programs that create PDF usually have quite different goals and
functionality. I guess the only valid comparison would be the quality of
the PDF output. If you need 100%-conformant PDF, scribus is probably the
best bet, with PDF 1.5 export coming up as well, only held back by the
absence of a Linux-based viewer, really.
Does any of the above viewers render the NYT mozilla firefox advertisement in it's full beauty?The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
http://www.mozilla.org/press/nytimes-firefox-final.pdf
There's ViewPDF based on xpdf for GNUstep, which is pretty nice, I think. There's also one based on gs which handles postscript too, but I forget its name right now.C'm'ere: and there's more...
This article failed to address a key issue for those of us with creaky old machines - which PDF readers pre-render pages? If a reader renders the next page while the current page is being read, I don't have to sit there and watch it render. On my PII/300, it's about half a second for a typical document, but half a second staring at a blank screen is long enough to start thinking about something else. The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
I wonder is there any PDF viewer on Linux which supports AES encryption (new feature of PDF 1.6)?The Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers
There is another pdf viewer which started this year. I am using it for few weeks now and... It works very well! Stable, fast and easy to use. Just what i need !New efficient pdf/ps viewer: Evince
http://www.gnome.org/projects/evince/
In the meanwhile xpdf has a homepage: http://www.foolabs.com/xpdfThe Grumpy Editor's Guide to PDF Viewers