Reducing the Size of Large PDFs | Hacker News Reader

Reducing the Size of Large PDFs

leancrew.com

97 pointsingve23 comments

There is a general PDF shrinker, known as "pdfsizeopt" that is bundled with static builds of gs and a number of other utilities.

It cuts some of our PDFs to 10x smaller, mostly by removing unused fonts (but doubtless also some other magic).

The developer asks for donations for production use from those who can afford it.

https://github.com/pts/pdfsizeopt

Send donations to the author of pdfsizeopt:

https://flattr.com/submit/auto?user_id=pts&url=https://githu...

Oh man, I've been down the rabbit hole of reducing matplotlib PDF sizes too many times. Ghostscript is great most of the time, but as mkl points out, it can make some PDFs bigger.

In particular, matplotlib plots that use points (markers) blow up in size quite a bit after processing through ghostscript, due to the way matplotlib re-uses spline information to draw the e.g. circles, where as ghostscript seemingly cannot / chooses not to (?). I recall something to do with xobject re-use...

I've also found that if you use type 42 fonts (helpful if submitting to a conference where the submission system doesn't accept type 3 fonts), matplotlib will not subset the font, resulting in increased file sizes.

So I use a similar ghostscript script, but one that also checks if the resulting file is actually smaller. If it's bigger, it just uses the original PDF. For files with lots of points, I've found that rasterizing just the points artist is a good solution (everything else in the plot is still vector), which allows for ghostscript to subset the type 42 fonts without the file-size explosion due to the points. Still, I wish there was a good way or script to e.g. just subset fonts in a PDF file, as well as processing a PDF to remove redundant fonts.

When including many PDF plots into a large LaTeX document, each PDF still comes with embedded fonts, which can increase the file size of the final PDF. Most of the fonts end up being duplicates. For this, I use a custom matplotlib backend that creates a PDF file with no text, together with a PGF file that specifies the position of each text. LaTeX then handles all the text rendering (which results in nice looking figures!), so each font is only included once in the final PDF.

Wow, this sounds really cool! Out of curiosity, did you get bad results with the pure PGF backend? (And can you link to your script by any chance?) I'm always amazed that including matplotlib plots in LaTeX documents is so fraught since it's such common use case.

Also I read that matplotlib 3.5 has some sort of improved support for type 42 subsetting. I haven't had a chance to try it out yet but this could be a welcome improvement!

Oh didn't know about the improved type 42 font support in the new matplotlib! That's good to know and I should check it out.

And good point, the PGF works just as well (results should be identical), but since all the plot information has to be compiled by latex, it ends up ballooning the compilation time of the tex doc and the matplotlib PGF page suggests that you can run into memory issues as well. I was doing this for a thesis with 50+ plots and so still wanted compilation to be fast.

I've suggested this as an improvement to matplotlib, but unlikely to be merged since maybe it's a bit hacky (although it's very similar to what Inkscape's export to LaTeX option does): https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/issues/22297 (the backend file can be found here: https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/files/7921801/backe...)

And the gs script is below:

  #!/bin/bash
  set -e
  set -o pipefail
  if [ -z $1 ]; then
    echo "Supply input output"
    exit 1;
  fi

  if [ -z $2 ]; then
    outfile="$(basename ${1} .pdf)-small.pdf"
    if [ -f $outfile ]; then
      echo "WARNING ${outfile} already exists."
      echo "Supply input output"
      exit 1;
    fi
  else
    outfile="${2}"
  fi

  gs -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -dCompatibilityLevel=1.4 -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -dQUIET -dDetectDuplicateImages=true -r150 -sOutputFile="${outfile}" "${1}"

  pre_b=$(wc -c "${1}" | cut -d' ' -f1)
  post_b=$(wc -c "${outfile}" | cut -d' ' -f1)
  if (( $pre_b <= $post_b )); then
    echo "Original is smaller ($pre_b -> $post_b). copying..."
    cp "${1}" "${outfile}"
  fi

In the past, I've used pdf2ps to convert the PDF to a PostScript file, then used ps2pdf to convert it back to a PDF. This often reduces the file size substantially.

I probably wouldn't recommend doing this for anything serious (since it might negatively affect the a11y of the file), but in the right situations it can be a quick and simple way to massively reduce a PDF's filesize without noticeable side-effects.

I came across this trick once that worked to shrink a bunch of PDF files I needed to get up to meet a grant deadline. Convert it to postscript with poppler, and back to PDF with ghostscript. YMMV. http://tingletech.github.io/pdftrick/

Curious. I wonder what Matplotlib does that's so bad? If it's merely being pathological, then compressing the PDFs with JBIG2 would make them potentially even smaller. (I usually do that with 'ocrmypdf', which doesn't have to OCR your PDF.)

Depends on your PDF and your goals, I think. JBIG2 is for raster data, but Matplotlib outputs vector images by default when producing PDFs. Rasterising may help with things like huge numbers of points that hide each other, but at the cost of sharpness and scalability.

I use this to also reduce the color info by converting to grey:

    gs -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -dCompatibilityLevel=1.4 -dPDFSETTINGS=/ebook -dColorConversionStrategy=/Gray -dProcessColorModel=/DeviceGray -dNOPAUSE -dQUIET -dBATCH -sOutputFile=file-out.pdf file-in.pdf

That is a classic! The number of times my SO scanned black & white documents in colour and 400 dpi then (from Windows) then ended up with a gigantic PDF file that email would reject (or, worse, recipient's email would reject)... Then she calls me.

Typically I batch downsize and convert to gray, then create a smaller PDF from these downsized/gray'ed scans.

I'll definitely take notes from that blog and from this HN thread for I'm sure some will come in handy.

Wouldn’t a jpeg file make more sense than a pdf for images?

I've not tested this carefully, but AFAIR GhostScript re-compresses raster images and JPEG decommpress/compress round-trip reduces quality. QPDF keeps images intact but probably compresses less (in rare cases it increases size so one have to check which file is smaller):

qpdf --recompress-flate --object-streams=generate --compression-level=9 in.pdf out.pdf

They mention not wanting to upload to some sketchy site (very under standable), but wanted to note for the average user, Adobe has a free web service for compressing PDFs that works very well. Far better than the compression that comes with Preview or even Adobe Acrobat oddly. When typing "compress pdf" into Google it's the second result that pops up.

Just compressing PDFs is not informative enough to tell the user what it is doing under the hood. Is it subsetting fonts? That's usually harmless. Is it rasterizing the vector graphics? That's generally not fine by me. Is it downscaling the raster graphics? It's probably fine but would depend on the intended audience of the PDF and the DPI. Is it merely optimizing the compression used for compressing the content stream? That's also fine. Is it using some thresholding to reduce grayscale to black-and-white? That's only fine if the document is scanned. Etc, etc.

I can never trust this kind of "simple tool" that magically reduces file sizes without telling me what it's doing. Personally, I think PDF is too complicated a format to have this kind of simple file-size-reduction tool.

For the average user, I think PDF is too complicated a format to NOT have this kind of simple file-size-reduction tool.

Also (from https://www.adobe.com/acrobat/online/compress-pdf.html), they sell a tool that gives you more control:

”How do I compress a PDF without losing quality?

The Acrobat online PDF compressor balances an optimized file size against the expected quality of images, fonts, and other file content. Just drag and drop a PDF into the PDF compression tool above and let Acrobat reduce the size of your PDF files without compromising quality.

For more refined control of optimization settings, you can try Adobe Acrobat Pro DC for free for seven days. Acrobat Pro DC for the Mac or Windows operating system lets you customize PPI settings for color, grayscale, and monochrome image quality. You can also use PDF editor tools, edit scans with OCR functionality, convert PDFs to Microsoft PowerPoint and other file formats, convert PNGs and other image file formats, organize and rotate PDF pages, split PDFs, and more.”

I do this too. Be careful relying on it in an automated way, though: it will make some PDFs bigger.

This is so true. You can’t really win in general.

High res images are going to look pretty good in PDF/print. SVG is going to look amazing, infinitely zoom able and sharp at every level.

You’d think raster images are bigger, right? Well, SVGs of graphs can be huge.. imagine a scatter plot of a million data points. That’s roughly same sized PNG as the scatter plot with 1000 points at the same resolution. But, a million points is going to be both slow to draw and take a lot of space!

Wouldn't a good automation process compare the output and input filesizes and return whichever was smaller?

Yes, and I have a script that does that, which is what I mean by being careful.

For scans, DjVu[0] is incredibly good.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DjVu

Is DjVu really alive? I remember the days when it appeared, even the viewers were extremely slow on the hardware of that time, but it seems to be practically dead for the past decade.

App support for DjVu is the main downside. I see even the Internet Archive is backing off from their support.

PDF, IMO, is a horrible format, it's almost unparseable. I think we have to suck it up though and admit PDF won, and just deal with it by using tools like in OP's post to try to make the best of a bad situation.

It's a good trick, but I ocasionally get errors such as:

   GPL Ghostscript 9.10: Missing glyph CID=84, glyph=0054 in the font Helvetica-Light

Reply on news.ycombinator.com