GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 343667
incorrect rendering of CMYK JPEG
Last modified: 2008-01-15 13:08:27 UTC
Hi all ! Platform: Windows XP SP2 + GIMP 2.2.11 (bug exists also on SUSE Linux 10.0 + GIMP 2.2.8) Problem: I have converted a PDF file to CMYK JPEG - and it's rendered incorrectly by all open-source software, including KDE and the GIMP. (with only exception being KDE Krita 1.5) The software that renders the file correctly: (use the software listed below as reference) 1) MS Windows XP - Paint (strange for MS :) 2) Adobe Photoshop 9 CS2 3) KDE Krita 1.5.0
Created attachment 66649 [details] here is the CMYK JPEG file. NOTE: don't let the name to fool you - the file is OK - but is rendered incorrectly on most open-source software, including GIMP. NOTE2: because file is over 1MB I can't attach that to bug. I have compressed it with 7-zip to make attachable. Use either 7-zip on Windows or Ark on Linux on open it.
Created attachment 66650 [details] the original PDF file from which the CMYK JPEG was made. Use PDF reader (preferably Acrobat Reader 7) as a reference renderer, if you are on Linux, but have no Krita 1.5.x
Please file a bug-report against libjpeg then. The JPEG plug-in in GIMP uses this library to render the file.
Are you sure that the bug is in libjpeg? KDE and GNOME handly CMYK *very* differently - and the bug in KDE is much more serious than in GNOME. In fact this is NOT the same bug at all. Also where do I find libjpeg bugzilla ?
Try another app that uses libjpeg (for example eog, the gnome image viewer) and compare the results.
I don't use GNOME at all - with single exception -- The GIMP. plz help me find libjpeg bugzilla - I have found *no* way to report the bug to their team.
Created attachment 66743 [details] This PNG - is how it must look-like.
Created attachment 66744 [details] This PNG - is how it looks on GIMP 2.2 - incorrect colors.
Since the difference between the two files looks like a matter of color correction, I bet that the original JPEG file contains a color profile -- which GIMP, in fact, does not currently know how to handle. So you may well be right. Unfortunately, I don't have 7-zip (I've never even heard of it), so there is no way to be sure. Is it possible for you to shrink the file to a manageable size before converting to CMYK jpeg, and attach the result?
No problem - I have made an alternative link for uncompressed CMY JPEG here: http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=9D851CDA09944305 but this service is limited both to number of users & time. (up to 7 days) Also - any recent version of KDE Ark can uncompress the 7-zip format.
Hmm. That file contains an XMP metadata block, and looking at it, it looks like you created the file using Acrobat Distiller, and then edited it in Photoshop. Is that correct? The Colorspace is shown by GIMP's metadata plug-in as "4294967295", which, for what it is worth, is what you get when the number -1 is interpreted as an unsigned int. Most likely this reflects a bug in the metadata plug-in. If what I wrote above is correct, then you may be able to improve things by setting the Colorspace in Photoshop to sRGB before saving the file -- this is the Colorspace that GIMP currently expects jpeg files to be in. Another note: if I open the image using Imagemagick "display", and bring up the Information view, the program goes into an infinite loop and never shows anything. I don't know, though, whether this reflects a problem with the file or a bug in the program.
almost right - I have used Adobe Photoshop - no distiller at all. And converted with it from PDF to CMYK JPEG. If ImageMagic stuck and goes loop - then that's a DoS attack versus the program - and the bug is in program - no data file should be able to damage any program. Since I don't use ImageMagic at all - I can't open a bug versus it - because I won't be able to tell them the problem. But I would be thankful if you did open the bug versus them.
The main point of this report seems to be that GIMP doesn't respect the embedded color profile. Thus closing as a duplicate of bug #78265. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 78265 ***