News and Reviews > Mini-Reviews by Members

Quality Comparison: 8 x freeware PDF Readers / Viewers

<< < (2/22) > >>

Ampa:
Then I found the GDIplus Module on the Foxit website (Critical addons) and put it in the Foxit Reader folder. This dramatically improved the rendering quality...
--- End quote ---

I too found the 'critical addon' GDI+ module (and placed it in the Foxit install folder), but it seems to make no difference at all on the PDF that I am viewing.

Either I am doing something wrong, or the GDI+ module is hit and miss, or the crappy render quality I am seeing is with the GDI+ module.

I have attached the test PDF [286kb] to this post. If any one feels like testing it in Foxit with and without the GDI+ module I'd be interested in your finding.


I notice that I already have several versions of gdiplus.ddl residing on my disk...


system32   = v5.1.3102.2180
Foxit PDF  = v5.1.3102.1360
eXpert PDF = v6.0.3260.0


(So this is where I choose to delurk.)-hjoerdis
--- End quote ---
Congratulations :) - now keep posting!

Ampa:
Aha!!

Major break through...

I found an option in Foxit Reader: Preferences > Page Display > Display texts optimized for LCD screen

Quality Comparison: 8 x freeware PDF Readers / ViewersLCD optimization option
This makes a huge difference (though again I see no difference with or without the local copy of GDI+).

Quality Comparison: 8 x freeware PDF Readers / ViewersFoxit with LCD optimization
Optimised for LCD the render quality is vastly improved - certainly middle of the field.

@400% with LCD optimization@400% without LCD optimization
The option seems to enable XPs ClearType technology within Foxit, and is using coloured pixels to antialias the text, rather than greyscale. Interestingly none of the other viewers (Adobe included) use coloured pixels to antialias - I guess they just have a better greyscale algorithm.

Query: This raises an issue - how do the visual tests appear on CRT screens? It is quite possible that they appear quite differently to other users on other screen types?

Thoughts? Anyone?

f0dder:
I've used TFT screens for quite a while, and I plain hate cleartype - makes text have a sort of fuzzy/smudgy feel to it. Quite subtle, but bad enough to make it less easy on my eyes than the higher-contrast regular antialiasing. And yes, I've run the cleartype calibration wizard.

Adding gdiplus.dll to the foxit folder doesn't seem to change anything - but that's because it's already present elsewhere on my system, with Process Explorer in "module mode", I can see the GdiPlus.dll is loaded by Foxit even though not present in it's own install folder.

Foxit has much smoother scrolling (when zoomed in) than sumatra has (and a difference of ~20% vs ~60% CPU usage when using the "grabbing hand" to scroll quickly up and down... and that's on my dualcore 4400+ cpu). There seems to be a slight difference in rendering between the two, but can't really say which one has the better quality.

Darwin:
Nice find, ampa - thanks for that. I've been using Foxit Reader for a couple of years and never noticed that setting. That's very nice and makes my decision easier - I'll keep Foxit as my default reader and have Adobe hanging around for those times when I need it.

Eóin:
One big hit against Sumatra is it's 'printed' quality, it's an absolute disaster. I get the impression that it's passes a low-ish resolution raster image to the printer. Also it's painfully slow at doing so.

But anyway I realise this comparison was about 'on screen' quality.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page