View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0009158ScribusPDFpublic2010-06-11 21:26
ReporterMike Assigned Tojghali  
Status closedResolutionduplicate 
Product Version1.3.7 
Summary0009158: broken gradients and transparencies in alternative PDF viewers
Descriptionbroken gradients and transparencies in alternative PDF viewers
Steps To Reproduce- create PDF with gradients
- create PDF with transparency gradient
- see it in for example evince
Additional InformationSamples:
1, it was created directly by Scribus and exported to PDF
2, first picture was exported like svg and loaded into Inkscape, exported to PDF
Both are PDF 1-4, so transparency should be supported.

EVINCE: You can see that there is something wrong. There is additional white line and transparency is missing.

OKULAR and Xpdf: There is additional black line in transparency.

Sorry if this is viewer's problem. It seems to me as a Scribus issue because Inkscape has no problem with any of this viewers.
TagsNo tags attached.


duplicate of 0000876 confirmed Implement a transparency flattener 



2010-06-11 09:16



2010-06-11 09:17



2010-06-11 09:32

administrator   ~0024041

Evince has no proper transparency support and this is one of reason amongst others we strictly dis-recommend its usage for viewing pdf produced by Scribus.


2010-06-11 09:35

reporter   ~0024042

ok, but why Inkscape PDF display this correctly?


2010-06-11 09:37

reporter   ~0024043

If Inkscape somehow merges layers, Scribus could do too as a option.


2010-06-11 09:56

reporter   ~0024044

This would be very useful feature for printing too.


2010-06-11 10:04

administrator   ~0024045

Last edited: 2010-06-11 10:07

Inkscape uses cairo library for its pdf output, and does not output pdf by itself. Cairo is able to flatten transparency in rgb mode, but it has no color management support, no cmyk support and no spot color support, which means its transparency flattening is not conformant to pdf specs and consequently not useable by scribus...

Transparency flattener is already the object of a feature request (0000876)


2010-06-11 10:34

reporter   ~0024046

I understand now. Personally this functionality has high priority for me. You can close this as a duplicate.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2010-06-11 09:16 Mike New Issue
2010-06-11 09:16 Mike File Added: PDF_viewers_Scribus.pdf
2010-06-11 09:17 Mike File Added: PDF_viewers_Inkscape.pdf
2010-06-11 09:32 jghali Note Added: 0024041
2010-06-11 09:35 Mike Note Added: 0024042
2010-06-11 09:37 Mike Note Added: 0024043
2010-06-11 09:56 Mike Note Added: 0024044
2010-06-11 10:04 jghali Note Added: 0024045
2010-06-11 10:07 jghali Note Edited: 0024045
2010-06-11 10:34 Mike Note Added: 0024046
2010-06-11 21:26 jghali Relationship added duplicate of 0000876
2010-06-11 21:26 jghali Status new => resolved
2010-06-11 21:26 jghali Resolution open => duplicate
2010-06-11 21:26 jghali Assigned To => jghali
2010-06-11 21:26 jghali Status resolved => closed