Possible Bug: Split Pages Errs When Zoomed Out to 10%

[PHK]

The following suddenly started misbehaving after a series of successful operations. This was on two different computers and on two different versions of PDF-XCE: v.362 and v.363.

I have scanned 100+ page magazines where I want the pages merged onto a single sheet with the opposing pages (not the cover) merged side by side but all stacked vertically. I have posted a link to a typical file last week but here it is again: https://1drv.ms/b/s!AsBVtdXZAI89j_USHNcPswH61fFILQ .

My process is as follows:

1. Scan all pages of the magazine.
2. Resize all pages to 10% (so as to not fall afoul of the 200-inch maximium merge in the next step).
3. Merge pages, with a custom page range of 2-144 (more than the actual but variable page count) to exclude the cover, horizontally but with only 2 pages per sheet (to produce the side by side layout).
4. Split this new page/sheet (#2) vertically at +/- 49% and 51% to isolate the middle, or gutter, area that I want to eliminate.
5. Delete page #3, the gutter strip.
6. Merge pages 2 and 3 horizontally.
7. Merge all pages vertically.


I did this successfully on a few dozen files but then step #4 began producing unexpected results. Rather than generating 3 new pages (the left or even-numbered pages), the middle or gutter [the area between 49 and 51%], and the right or odd-numbered pages), it produces only 2 new pages (the left and the right, seemingly split at the 50% mark)!

If I resize the pages back to 100% after step #3 but before step #4, the split pages operation works as expected. But then I have to resize back to 10% before step #6.

So obviously there is something about the zoom level that is causing Split Pages to misbehave.

Could your techs take a look at that?

[Daniel - PDF-XChange]

Hello, PHK

The document you have attached here, appears to be either the final result, or the after merge "step3" point?

In any case I cannot reproduce the issue by reducing this document to 10% and then splitting. Could I ask you for the video of the process you are taking, and a copy of the document right after scanning in step 1, so that we can follow your process from there with the same file, and see what happens?

Kind regards,

[PHK]

...
The document you have attached here, appears to be either the final result, or the after merge "step3" point?

Correct. It was only included to illustrate the final "product."

In any case I cannot reproduce the issue by reducing this document to 10% and then splitting.

That's the frustrating thing: it was only after several successful iterations that I had the problem.

Could I ask you for the video of the process you are taking, and a copy of the document right after scanning in step 1, so that we can follow your process from there with the same file, and see what happens?...

https://1drv.ms/b/s!AsBVtdXZAI89j_UvVgwA_KwigEkVfw?e=gQIUz6

08-30-22.zip

https://1drv.ms/b/s!AsBVtdXZAI89j_VrJ0pvUtCgKHJ6ng?e=IEf6nb

By the way, there is no point in zooming back out to 100% before Splitting the pages because Split Pages apparently has the same 200-inch size limitations as Merge Pages but produces even more undesirable results: only the bottom 200 inches of the pages survive.

[Daniel - PDF-XChange]

Hello, PHK

Okay so, to begin, I should note, 200 inches is an approximation based on typical page scaling techniques, The actual "suggested limit" is 14400 points, to retain compatibility with older software.

With that in mind, your practice of reducing the page size to 10% is amicable, but more than encessary, I would suggest instead reducing it to 20% or even 30%, which still keeps the page within the suggested size after the merge, and does not seem to have the same problems with the split later on.

Looking at the document, I expect the reason for the problematic split is that you are trying to create a page which is 2.4 points wide (due to the scaling). I do not know offhand what the minimum page dimensions are, but I expect 2.4 points wide is below it, and the split likely fails because of that.

Following that, when merging the pages, you can define the custom range as simply "2-" without a final page number, to encompass all pages after page 2, without limit. Then you can look at the total pages selected (in this case 99) and enter half that, rounded up, as the custom pages per sheet value (2 by X) to merge all pages in a single action (this also has the advantage of showing you the output size before it is performed)

image.png

This has the handy effect of combining steps 3 and 7, so that you only need to split (step 4) and delete (Step 5) and then remerge the two tall pages, horizontally (step 6) (the best part is, for step 6 you can use the exact same setting as you used in step 3, custom range of 2 and beyond, no need to change anything else, since they are all remembered).

Kind regards,

[PHK]

... your practice of reducing the page size to 10% is amicable, but more than encessary, I would suggest instead reducing it to 20% or even 30%, which still keeps the page within the suggested size after the merge, and does not seem to have the same problems with the split later on.

Agree. Since previous post, I have been doing it at 25% which is good enough for this particular publication and does not seem to cause the problem I was reporting. The reduction to 10% was overkill, mea culpa.

Following that, when merging the pages, you can define the custom range as simply "2-" without a final page number, to encompass all pages after page 2, without limit. Then you can look at the total pages selected (in this case 99) and enter half that, rounded up, as the custom pages per sheet value (2 by X) to merge all pages in a single action (this also has the advantage of showing you the output size before it is performed)
image.png
This has the handy effect of combining steps 3 and 7, so that you only need to split (step 4) and delete (Step 5) and then remerge the two tall pages, horizontally (step 6) (the best part is, for step 6 you can use the exact same setting as you used in step 3, custom range of 2 and beyond, no need to change anything else, since they are all remembered).

Thanks for that tip! I certainly did not know that the final page number was not necessary. And eliminating some steps is a real boon. I appreciate your pointing this out as I had not seen it in any documentation and I have been adding final page numbers to custom ranges since I began using the product .

I consider this inquiry SOLVED!

[Daniel - PDF-XChange]