You can then report the problem as a bug to the appropriate site. If the PDF looks poor in Acrobat then that's a Ghostscript problem. While Inkscape supports the classic import options of PNG, EPS, PDF, and SVG files, it doesnt support third-party document importing for file types like Figma. If the PDF looks fine in Acrobat, but not so good in Inkscape, then I'd say that's an Inkscape problem. You can also open the PDF in, say, Acrobat to see if it looks OK there. You could use Ghostscript to convert the EPS to PDF yourself, and then try loading the PDF into Inkscape to see if you get a better result. Shadings will either have to be rendered to an image or converted into a complex series of SVG primitives.įollowing the link on 'How to open EPS files in Windows' from the FAQ suggests to me that EPS files are either rendered to an image or converted to PDF. That's going to mean that an awful lot of PostScript (and PDF) vector objects aren't going to be represented well. Reading through the Inkscape FAQ it seems that Inkscape uses SVG as its native format. Generally I'd say this looks like an Inkscape bug and you should report it as such. It's not entirely obvious what you used to render the left hand image, is that Ghostscript ? It could also be a problem calculating a clip. This could simply be a rendering problem with Inkscape, or it could be that the radial fill has an Extend parameter which isn't being honoured.
I'd suggest that the circular artefacts are caused by radial fills not being rendered completely. If you are on a Mac then you can use the EPS right way but in Windows you need graphic software like Adobe Illustrator or Corel Draw to open this file. It's a little difficult to tell, partly because this is a complex illustration and partly because the rendering is a little small.
0 kommentar(er)
