![]() ![]() I wanted to see if any of them were corrupt. ![]() I had a large number of PDF files scattered around my drive. In both the printing and non-printing approaches, the following text raises many thoughts and points out many technicalities that may be of interest to others who seek good PDF-testing tools. That said, it appeared that the non-printing alternatives discussed below were at least representative if not dominant among the possible approaches available to most users. No doubt there are many other printing and non-printing approaches than are explored here. Some portions of this post explore non-printing alternatives, both free and commercial. It seemed that readable but partly corrupted PDFs would be especially susceptible of detection when every page of every PDF was being run through a printer, even if the output was purely digital. While I found those PDF-printing approaches to be far slower than the CorruptedPDFinder and Acrobat approaches, they had an advantage of thoroughness. Most of this post explores various PDF-printing approaches, leading up to the choice of that Adobe Reader approach as the best of the lot. For more information on that command-line option, see the Recap at the end of this post. I found three that worked: CorruptedPDFinder the File > Create PDF > Batch Create Multiple Files procedure within Adobe Acrobat and a command-line PDF-printing approach using Adobe Reader. I looked for ways to test large numbers of PDFs in Windows 7. Note: a later post provides a short version of key points from this post. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |