PNG image from DOCX attachment 144253 [details] from bug 119329 is blurred on fileopen from LO 6.4+. Seen in screenshot attachment 155257 [details]. Similar for DOCX attachment 145239 [details] seen in screenshot attachment 155258 [details].
I saw it in Windows and I don't see it Linux. But that can be wrong due to different versions. Please test.
Created attachment 155259 [details] DOCX compared in MSO and LO with OpenGL I saw it in Windows with Open GL (as this screenshot shows where all LO are with OpenGL). No repro without OpenGL (as previous screenshot wrongly mixed OpenGL). I don't have OpenGL in Linux at the moment, so I mark Windows until proven otherwise.
Created attachment 155335 [details] LO 6.3 vs LO 6.4 with OpenOGL: LO 6.3.4 (OK), LO 6.4 (blurred) without OpenGL even LO 6.4 is OK
tried to bisect but with *no* clear result: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/plugins/gitiles/core/+log/d4ad516bc0607a1d84451dd3dc8811a4f801fa4c/ /cygdrive/d/sources/bibisect/bibisect-win64-6.4 $ git bisect bad 13228c284ddd9181f8383360636b42d7a463fd61 is the first bad commit commit 13228c284ddd9181f8383360636b42d7a463fd61 Author: Norbert Thiebaud <nthiebaud@gmail.com> Date: Thu Oct 10 07:01:28 2019 -0700 source d4ad516bc0607a1d84451dd3dc8811a4f801fa4c source d4ad516bc0607a1d84451dd3dc8811a4f801fa4c :040000 040000 98b483ba4bcf6fd5b1a4f5e329fcdfb1018d7a06 b1bbc7003a5ab66ee705e26e7955881a1d60ed45 M instdir /cygdrive/d/sources/bibisect/bibisect-win64-6.4 $ git bisect log # bad: [f3a96af9745e81ff222b8ab4a0b52960678b55eb] source ad0a97ca200328d336a3cd58942f71a824b1f23a # good: [8d1eaf05d47fd1c56ddecbe57a9a7c8289ede7f4] source c98b1f1cd43b3e109bcaf6324ef2d1f449b34099 git bisect start 'master' 'oldest' # good: [26b7367f6f96f6095fb453d056cadbc2504e5857] source b65a0b7fb7edbb15b2c1a534cc753afe4362c143 git bisect good 26b7367f6f96f6095fb453d056cadbc2504e5857 # good: [e383215d4154c5c62e38dc5b2e568b4265fa58f9] source 058c406c1610df7e557b9405619388465d3f056b git bisect good e383215d4154c5c62e38dc5b2e568b4265fa58f9 # good: [c4cf335626577c71e374bde6ea221a72069260fd] source c8bf651fb9b97eca6af7d1d26c62681cc5c7ec0f git bisect good c4cf335626577c71e374bde6ea221a72069260fd # bad: [d4349492b62a16e321ddbf45878d00720dfe700d] source 1412280847aeeaa65bc068e488c235831903b29e git bisect bad d4349492b62a16e321ddbf45878d00720dfe700d # good: [bdac1b191bb58c6856fc5a07aa511d808f4477a7] source 70ae1da67310a596e5bc49f1053c7ff72c84f539 git bisect good bdac1b191bb58c6856fc5a07aa511d808f4477a7 # bad: [e97b46c7107b6618a7bb5d4e0c7daaef4cff4285] source b7e4e85170e383ecd1cba56913c901783cb8d1d6 git bisect bad e97b46c7107b6618a7bb5d4e0c7daaef4cff4285 # bad: [b331afd1aeee0a73bb045658b68184faaef026d1] source f5d02bdc6831588c0442fa24c5913971a224c4fa git bisect bad b331afd1aeee0a73bb045658b68184faaef026d1 # bad: [75d29b8111809bb2afb04eaa20ed357c997b75f0] source 5db9bfee77e560c46457a40aee3d2b0752ab2fd8 git bisect bad 75d29b8111809bb2afb04eaa20ed357c997b75f0 # bad: [3fb49930af09e12590f4e545a62fdb95909c9aaa] source a7e59449cc7222a1d3edf66b3d8f8efd5541827d git bisect bad 3fb49930af09e12590f4e545a62fdb95909c9aaa # good: [502ddf144187c760417c0c6020ec1d0bd4bb803b] source b8a2e715daed46f7eba66f20c92e7bea405d0b53 git bisect good 502ddf144187c760417c0c6020ec1d0bd4bb803b # good: [d9c2fd6ca053e339ffb82d98652a0db27c4761e4] source 1fb87997031d6318ddf8ddf9714d2585a92f7667 git bisect good d9c2fd6ca053e339ffb82d98652a0db27c4761e4 # bad: [98e8a32abcdd41874cffdd593a2db715aff627a4] source a11926f900e5b20c1ef924d139a8ae35937aa224 git bisect bad 98e8a32abcdd41874cffdd593a2db715aff627a4 # bad: [13228c284ddd9181f8383360636b42d7a463fd61] source d4ad516bc0607a1d84451dd3dc8811a4f801fa4c git bisect bad 13228c284ddd9181f8383360636b42d7a463fd61 # first bad commit: [13228c284ddd9181f8383360636b42d7a463fd61] source d4ad516bc0607a1d84451dd3dc8811a4f801fa4c
(In reply to Oliver Brinzing from comment #3) > with OpenOGL: LO 6.3.4 (OK), LO 6.4 (blurred) > without OpenGL even LO 6.4 is OK Strange that we get different results. I *repro* with 6.3.0 beta with OpenGL. I guess you tried bibisect with 6.4? Did you have good with "git checkout oldest" (I wouldn't at my system) and bad with master? Xisco, what do you see?
Created attachment 155433 [details] LO_64_oldest_with_opengl.PNG (In reply to Timur from comment #5) > (In reply to Oliver Brinzing from comment #3) > > with OpenOGL: LO 6.3.4 (OK), LO 6.4 (blurred) > > without OpenGL even LO 6.4 is OK > Strange that we get different results. I *repro* with 6.3.0 beta with OpenGL. > I guess you tried bibisect with 6.4? Did you have good with "git checkout > oldest" (I wouldn't at my system) and bad with master? yes, LO 6.4 (oldest) is good, but master is bad (blurred) if OpenGL is enabled.
Maybe Xisco or Buovjaga may shed some light on this.
There was a change and now with LO 6.5+ image is better that 6.4+ but still not as clear as 6.2.
Created attachment 157075 [details] DOCX compared LO 6.2 and 6.5+ There was a change and now with LO 6.5+ image is better than in 6.4+ but still not as clear as 6.2.
IIUC there's no OpenGL anymore in Windows so WontFix.