In the early days of publishing, it was common to use placeholder graphics for a variety of reasons, then replace them with the "real" images before sending the documents to production. The placeholders were usually marked conspicuously "For Position Only," but occasionally some would slip past proofreaders, and be published.
I can't remember if turning off FrameMaker's graphics display retains anchored and unanchored frames but hides the graphics they contain. Hiding the frames obviously would disrupt layouts. I seem to remember that one proposed solution for avoiding slow display of graphics in FrameMaker, in the distant past, was to create low-resolution copies of referenced graphics, with duplicate names, in a duplicate-named directory tree, then swap the two trees before publishing the documents. An even fainter memory seems to recall that there may have been a script that renamed the directory trees, paths, and/or filenames in MIF, or in the operating system (Windows or UNIX.) It's obvious that round-tripping large document sets to and from MIF, even with the aid of scripts, could be problematic. HTH Peter Gold > Have any of you worthies seen and fixed this issue? > I get a very slow response in FrameMaker when scrolling through files with > > referenced images. Obviously, the more images the slower the response > when > > moving through the pages in a file. > > It takes longer than it should for each image to appear as the page > scrolls _______________________________________________ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to [email protected] Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to [email protected]
