Message-Id: <mailto:199507101453.JAA01034@library.wustl.edu> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 09:49:05 CST From: David Riecks <mailto:riecks@CC-MAIL.AGCOMED.UIUC.EDU> Subject: Re[2]: Archiving images and documents painlessly To: Multiple recipients of list IMAGELIB
On 7/10/95 Rina Gribovsky wrote:>>I can offer advice in the image file format category. Consider using JPG
or at least GIF. First of all, these two are the most widely used file formats for imaging (closest you can get to a "standard"; just check WWW: the small images that are part of the page are usually GIF, while the larger, more detailed images are usually JPG). As such, JPG and GIF files are more readily transferable between users and programs. (If given a choice between JPG and GIF, I would definitely prefer JPG...).<< >>The only reason I can think of not using JPG is if you want image files
that a computer can read with absolutley NO LOSS at all (remember, when something's being compressed, something's gotta go...) However, this LOSS is apparently NOT perceived by the human eye (although there's been some discussion on this group before about that, and it's not my specialty...)<<I think I erred in my original post by not indicating what/how these images would be used. We are a communications services unit that produces booklets, brochures, magazines, video, etc for the university. We need an image file that will reproduce well in printed materials primarily and for video or web use secondly. We do use some compression (generally Compactor on the Mac side and LZW on the PC side), but this is always lossless. Many of these images were originally created to be reproduced quite large 5 x 7 or 8 x 10 RGB color at 300 dpi or higher. Some we have original high-res files from a service bureau (20+ MB) that we paid $20 or $30 for each scan. For images which we can see potential re-use, we are looking for a way of archiving them without taking up massive amounts of space on our server. Our design section also produces everything on Quark or Pagemaker so we also need to store the document file with the attached images.
Some of these applications work better using EPS files, so the artists will usually convert the TIFF to EPS and attach and size the image. Now we are trying to decide whether we are better off keeping the entire document w/EPS files intact or break up the components and archive those.
Thanks for you input, perhaps this will clarify some points I was not as clear about.
Thanks,
David
********************************************************************** *| David Riecks | A reasonable person arranges their |* *| University of Illinois | life to the world around them... |* *| mailto:riecks@uiuc.edu | An unreasonable person arranges the |* *| | world around them to their life! |* ********************************************************************** How unreasonable are you?