On 7 Sep 2006 at 12:47, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
> David W. Fenton / 2006/09/07 / 11:42 AM wrote:
>
> >But not everyone has a TIF viewer.
>
> Oh, c'mon. You can say that to PNG viewer. I had TIF viewer on my
> Win95 but not PNG!
If you have Firefox, you had a PNG viewer.
Most people don't have graphics programs, or don't know how to use
them. If their browser doesn't support it, they don't know how to
view it, and I know of no browser that displays TIFs.
> >I just exported a single system TIF at 600dpi. The file size was
> >226KB. When I saved that as a GIF its size was 105KB.
>
> But you can zip TIF, and the end file size is less than 1/3 (I think
> it's close to 1/4).
But it's still larger than the compressed PNG, and barely smaller
than the uncompressed PNG:
original zipped
TIF 231KB 50KB
PNG 53KB 49KB
GIF 107KB 107KB
The GIF, of course, does not compress at all, as it's internally
compressed already.
And, of course, if you're dealing with a compressed ZIP, then it's
different, still. Here are the results:
original zipped
Uncompressed TIF 231KB 50KB
LZW TIF 122KB 104KB
Huffman encoding 89KB 53KB
FAX-CCITT 3 90KB 56KB
Packbits 229KB 43KB
None of the compressed formats created by my graphics program
(PaintShop Pro) is more efficient than a zipped uncompressed TIF, and
only the zipped uncompressed TIF is smaller than the unzipped PNG.
--
David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com
David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
