PDF-Basics is a service provided by PDFzone.com | http://www.pdfzone.com/ __________________________________________________________________
Gads. My test is accurate and contradicted Lynn's contention. Also see a later response from Olaf Drummer, an expert with Callas Software, who also verified that all bitmap images are treated equally when distilled from PostScript. The EPS image file contained in my test was compressed with JEPG compression, as was the tiff. The only difference is that the file which I PostScripted and Distilled was slightly smaller than the exported PDF (which uses the Adobe PDF library). This entire thread has nothing to do with vector graphics...the original poster had bitmapped images (photos) saved in EPS format. The question is why she has a 57 MB PDF file. The solution needs to start with how the PDF is being made, and what components are going into the original Quark file. To this point, we are lacking that information. Rich -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Hiniker Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 3:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PDF-Basics] RE: [PDF] Huge PDF files from quark 6 (on mac) PDF-Basics is a service provided by PDFzone.com | http://www.pdfzone.com/ __________________________________________________________________ I am not knowledgeable enough to know if Lynn is correct about the image compression but it seems to me that, if anything Rich Spragues test only confirmed the accuracy of Lynn's theory. Lynn said that raster images contained in an EPS file were not compressed. Rich put a raster image in an EPS file and, voila, it was not compressed. It seems to me that, to test the theory, you should take an EPS file containing only vector graphics, PDF it and test it. Then take an EPS file containing vector graphics and, as Lynn suggests, some raster information. Or perhaps RIP the original EPS and then see if the compression percentage is the same as the compression on the vector version. Dan -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rich Sprague Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 5:51 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [PDF] Huge PDF files from quark 6 (on mac) The PDF list is a service provided by PDFzone.com | http://www.pdfzone.com __________________________________________________________________ Are you sure? I don't think this is true. To test this theory, I took a 3.5 x 4.62 color 300 dpi image and saved it both as an EPS file and a TIFF file. I imported each image into InDesign, one at a time. Then I exported PDF's using the Press quality settings. Both PDF files were 1.12 MB. Just for kicks, I printed the EPS version to PostScript, then distilled using Press settings. I was not surprised with the results. The Distilled version was slightly smaller, 988KB. When I pre-flighted the PDF (Acro 6), the image indicated JPG compression. Rich -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lynn Mead Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 2:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [PDF] Huge PDF files from quark 6 (on mac) The PDF list is a service provided by PDFzone.com | http://www.pdfzone.com __________________________________________________________________ It is possible to have EPS images that contain rasterized information too. In these cases I believe that any distiller settings for downsampling and compression are _NOT_ applied to the raster information inside the EPS. Lynn To change your subscription: http://www.pdfzone.com/discussions/lists-pdfbasics.html To change your subscription: http://www.pdfzone.com/discussions/lists-pdfbasics.html
