On 1/06/2012 10:37 AM, William (Bill) R. Linhart wrote: > Dave, thanks for your thoughts. > > I use several different image processing programs with my TIFs (20+ > MB) and I don't have any of the problems like I have with Legacy. The > Picasa desktop viewer is lightening fast with even my largest images. > That viewer presents thumbnails across the bottom of the screen > (picture gallery) and works like a champ. It works great for me. > And, it is FREE. > > Legacy image processing has not kept up with the current standards > recommended by conservation experts. I recently attended a meeting of > museum curators and the recommendation there was a minimum of 300 dpi > minimum with 600 dpi recommended for document preservation. The > format recommended was TIF. My 8 x 10 inch images at 300 dpi are > about 20 MB in TIF. This is the minimum standard recommended for > museum curators to use for documents. My original is larger than 8 x > 10 but I downsized to 8 x 10 to try to get Legacy to work with it ... > with out success. > > I understand your statement about photographs of group shots of > people. That is not my current challenge. In my case, these are > reproductions of pages from a very large bible from 1873. The > handwriting is fading and not always easy to discern for transcription > so I want all the detail preserved that is to be captured. > > I hope you understand that it is not slowness that I am concerned about. > > It is the problem that Legacy goes into an indefinite loop without any > error handling. > > Last night I ran a test and reported it to Sherry. I waited 40+ > minutes (at solid 35% CPU) for the loop to stop processing a 1-2 MB > JPG before I terminated the process. That is not slowness. That is > a product defect. Legacy is flawed. If Legacy has a maximum image > size supported, a warning message should tell the end user that the > images they are attempting to link are large and not supported by > Legacy. I should not have to find this out by experimentation. I > lost many hours on this defect in Legacy. > > Legacy does not provide clear documentation ,that I can find, that > says there is a maximum image size that is supported. In fact, some > may believe that since Legacy does not store images, size does not > matter. I looked at the website link Sherry provided. I don't see > the 200 KB maximum posted there. Maybe Legacy did publish it but did > not pop out at me. I can't find in the manual or in the online help > text either. Picture gallery does work fine for just a few large > images. It is the number of images that seems to bother picture > gallery, that is, the number of thumbnails it is trying to render and > display. > > I like the other application features of Legacy so far. I hope this > defect gets fixed. > > Dave, I looked at your website ... looks like you have reached a very > nice place in life ... God Speed. > > Bill Bill, I feel I have to jump in here. I have 40 odd photos in the picture gallery and have suffered absolutely no slow down what-so-ever. I can only assume something else is causing your problem... I doubt Legacy would be slowing down your computer because of photos. I just attach them as is, with no size reduction, and without any problems. I cant help you further but insist that I think the problem is elsewhere. Graham >
Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
