![]() ![]() "List potential font problems, by contrast, indeed lists "potential problems". Embedding fonts in Preflight, or "Fix potential font problems," "Embed missing fonts," or "Fix font encoding (CIDSet) -using Preflight fix ups again - do not help either. (Exporting to Word or Html, however, does not. As in another comment above: "Copy with Formatting" solves the issue. The problem is only with copying: some fonts get missing: E.g.: "The idea" (as displayed on the pdf) becomes "e Idea" when pasted. The problem: The vector pdf, created with the application Acrobat Distiller 17.0, it says under File Properties, looks fine, including the fonts. Just wanted to state that the problem I have is not solved by the current instructions either. ![]() ![]() When it happens accidentially it usually means the software exporting the PDF didn't pass the correct font information to the PDF print driver (in the PostScript stream). When this happens intentionally, it means the document author has removed or re-written the toUnicode map, using a plugin. You can do it using plugins but would have to manually work out what each pair should be, and recreate the map table a letter at a time. The result when you screenread, export, search or copy/paste is a default set of mappings - so it will be a 1:1 relationship (every "A" will become the same character) - but the pairing is not predictable, so it cannot automatically be repaired. If this toUnicode map is corrupted or missing, the PDF will render to screen (and print) just fine, but Acrobat has no idea what the shapes mean. ![]() in the word APPLE the first table says the second shape looks like "P" even if the shapes aren't stored in alphabetical order, the toUnicode table says the second letter is 0x0050, a capital P). When you copy or search the file, the second lookup table is used to work out what the text says (i.e. Acrobat uses the first table to draw the page, so it doesn't actually know what the text "says", only which patterns of shapes to draw. I'm pretty new in DJ stuff and I want to understand what I do and learn good practices as of now.It's a "problem" that often happens accidentally, but is also used intentionally to prevent copying and indexing of PDF files, especially when posted online.įonts in PDF files are stored with two tables, one contains the glyphs (the character shapes) and one contains a "toUnicode" map, which says what character each glyph represents. I'll let you guess where the weird song is:ĭoes anyone have a clue about this? I really want to understand that behaviour. I also recorded a "set" containing little parts of different songs, and uploaded it on Soundcloud. Anyway, MP3Gain confirm the 90db volume, so it shouldn't sound louder nor look louder on the waveform, right ? According to the VU meter, it also sounds a bit louder but this could be due to the fact that the song has a constant loud bassline. On the right, the song that still has a huge waveform after MP3Gain. On the left, a "normal" song (the waveform is thin but it's logic as I set my songs at 90 db). I use MP3Gain for some time now, I set it to 90 db and it has always worked well.īut I have a song setted at 90 db like the others and I have the feeling it sounds the same volume (but I can be wrong), but the waveform displayed in Traktor is completely different from the others: I'm new here, I hope I'm posting the right place! ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |