Hadn't thought of the multiple instance angle...good point.

My clients have opted for the Cut/Paste (yes, groan all at once) because
even the fast option of saving as TIFF and importing slows down a doc with
300 or more captures. They had more difficulty managing file names than
managing files referenced in multiple locations.

Along those lines, another client refuses to import native .ai files and
instead uses EPS because of the .5 second delay in preview. The little
things count when multipled out hundreds of times! 

-Matt Sullivan

GRAFIX Training, Inc.

An Adobe Authorized Training Center


888 882-2819 

-----Original Message-----
From: Combs, Richard [mailto:richard.co...@polycom.com] 
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 4:15 PM
To: Matt Sullivan; Framers List
Subject: RE: High quality images

Matt Sullivan wrote: 

> For screen captures, my clients have the best success simply 
> pasting from SnagIt, or their application of choice. As the 
> files would almost never be modified in a bitmap editor, but 
> simply re-captured, the image on disk is a bit redundant. 

Importing by reference is _far_ better than pasting, IMHO. The graphics
file on disk isn't "redundant" because it's the only instance that
exists. The docs contain only a link to that file, not the graphic
itself. Then, when the screen changes, I just replace the graphics file,
and the doc is automatically updated. If the same screen shot appears in
several places, I don't have to remember them all -- just replace the
one file that's referenced in each place. 


Richard G. Combs
Senior Technical Writer
Polycom, Inc.
richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom

Reply via email to