[Coco] RE: Rainbow magazines]
zmerch at 30below.com
Wed Jun 8 17:31:54 EDT 2005
Rumor has it that Rswoger at aol.com may have mentioned these words:
> >From Bob
>You guys are right. I just tried to OCR a JPG and a GIF. Many mistakes. I
>tried PNG and TIFF as suggested also available as saves from paint.
Lordy, why are you using Paint?
Check out ACDSee - very nice Image viewer/converter; it'll do batch
convert/rotate/resize/etc. very easily. The earlier versions are quite
small & fast as well; tho creature feep is moving in on the latest version...
There are many other freeware/shareware/beerware converters out there that
are batch capable - they might save you quite a bit of time.
> PNGs were better and TIFF were even better yet.
Did you actually look at the the size of the TIFFs? [[ See below for the
>I believe that obtaining program listings using OCR would be a real PLUS.
Assuming whomever does it is willing to actually double-check what the OCR
program spit out -- these proggies are by no means anywhere close to perfect.
>I for one hate PDF files because of their size and the requirement for a
>reader which is also large and slow.
[[ Regarding above WRT TIFF files... ]]
PDF files are large when they contain only scanned graphics -- if the text
is OCR'ed first, the files themselves become correspondingly smaller; I use
OpenOffice as my spreadsheet, and it has a one-click PDF creator... and
also output's HTML. The HTML is on average 27K; the PDFs average 36K; and
the PDF's look one heckuva lot better than the corresponding HTML.
I can post examples of each to the web if you wish to see them.
As such, TIFFs are either uncompressed or losslessly compressed, so are
usually quite large; and a lot of programs can't handle compressed TIFFs at
all, let alone multipage TIFFs. Yes, they exist, no, most software can't
deal with 'em very well at all. :-( The compression that PDFs can use is 1)
on average a little more efficient than what's available with TIFFs, and 2)
multipage files are not only well-supported, but much easier to navigate.
Oh, and Adobe Reader versions < 5 are actually rather speedy, 5 is so-so, 6
is really where they start doggin' it down. Needless to say, I don't run 6.
;-) There are also several freeware readers out there, some of which are
quite speedy. PDF is a fully documented standard also, so there'll be
readers available for it for a good long time.
Another great example of PDFs that work great is the release of the book
Thinking Forth from Leo Brodie, that our very own John Hogerhuis helped
bring about. Almost 300 pages, and it's less than 4.4 megs. AFAIK, there's
no other on-screen reader that could come close to the 'ease of use' of
> As you see on my web site, I like something
>small and fast like I give you all when you read the newsletters.
Small is less of an issue as people won't be downloading it -- they'll be
browsing 'em off of the CD-ROM/DVD-ROM disk. "Fast" is difficult to gauge
as if it's low enough quality it'll be tough (and slower) to read (and
subsequently OCR later -- personally, I've have very little luck OCRing
anything under 300dpi; 600 is better (with the subsequent 4x increase in
image size)) and so a quick 'opening' time may lead to a slower 'usability'
TIFF can't easily handle mixed-mode data -- if the data/text/listings were
OCRed, how would you access it? With PDFs, it's a highlight, copy & paste
function. With TIFFs, it's not gonna happen. PDFs are also
hypertext-capable - if indexed, you could click on an index reference, and
go right to that page.
A lot is going to depend on what tradeoffs will be made between quality,
speed, ease of use, and of course (and most importantly) the ability to
reach the widest audience available with the product.
I'm not saying that PDFs are the be all and end all of data viewers -- just
that 1) whoever does the job needs to weigh the pros & cons of what they
use carefully and 2) don't exclude a large portion of the target market due
to the format choice.
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
Roger "Merch" Merchberger -- SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers
_±±_ zmerch at 30below.com
(©||®) If at first you don't succeed, nuclear warhead
_)(_ disarmament should *not* be your first career choice.
More information about the Coco