keep with next para (solved)

[Graeme R Forbes]

I knew there had to be a simple solution. You prevent a page break 
occurring at a soft return by putting a sufficiently large number (I 
used 4) in the Widow/Orphan control box on the Pagination page of the 
Para Designer. Thanks to Stuart Rogers for suggesting this.

Graeme Forbes

Question about applying and removing character tags in FM6.0

[Peter Gold]

Hi, Maxwell:

I'd suggest a slight variation on Clint's suggestion:

Select the affected range of text, open the character designer, click
the Commands button, choose Set Window To As-Is, THEN disable Change
Bars and click apply. The Designers pick up text attributes from the
selection; setting all to as-is first, is a precaution to retain all
local formatting - applied with or without tags - in the selection.
Regards,

Peter
___
Peter Gold
KnowHow ProServices

On Feb 6, 2008 2:46 PM, maxwell.hoffmann
 wrote:
> I have a basic, really dumb question about character tags.  (Think I
> know the answer, but need to check.)
>
>
>
> If I apply a character tag for [Change Bars] to several paragraphs, (and
> the char tag is defined all "as is" settings, except for change bar), is
> there anyway to remove the character tag and not wipe out format
> overrides (e.g  [bold] and [emphasis]) character tags on the sentence
> level?
>
>
>
> This is in unstructured FrameMaker, V6.0. I know that the traditional
> way to get rid of a character tag is F8 or [Default Para Tag]. I am
> checking to see if there is some way to remove just one tag and not
> interfere with other format overrides. (I think the answer is there is
> no way.)
>
>
>
> Maxwell Hoffmann
> Production Lead
> Welocalize
>
> Tel. 503.274.2211
> Mob. 301.693.7728
> Fax: 503.274.2611
> www.welocalize.com 
>

re: keep with next para (solved)

[Graeme R Forbes]

I knew there had to be a simple solution. You prevent a page break 
occurring at a soft return by putting a sufficiently large number (I 
used 4) in the Widow/Orphan control box on the Pagination page of the 
Para Designer. Thanks to Stuart Rogers for suggesting this.

Graeme Forbes
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Working with Images

[Stuart Rogers]

John Sgammato wrote:
> When you capture a 96dpi image at higher resolution, you will never
> see detail that isn't there (of course) but you can do more with the
> image because your OWN image of the image is capable of showing
> greater resolution. You can look at it as if your high-res image
> capture dices the existing image into smaller pieces. As an extreme
> example, consider an original image of alternating 1-inch black and
> white elements along a line at 10 dpi. Capture that image at 100 dpi
> and you really have 10 times as many 0.1-inch elements to work with,
> all faithful in location, dimension, and color to the original. If
> you need to rotate or stretch or manipulate the image in any way, or
> if any of your processes cause the image to lose resolution, the new
> hi-res image will be more forgiving. Likewise if you print the image,
> the printer is limited by its own resolution - the higher-resolution
> image can help to compensate.
> 
> This is easy to test for your self: in Illustrator (or similar)
> generate a black square and inside it a white circle or diamond.
> Repeat at smaller intervals until you get bored. Save as .ai, then
> export to .tiff twice. For the first select 96dpi and call it
> lo-res.tiff, and for the second export at 400dpi and call it
> hi-res.tiff. Then import them side-by side into FM and see how they
> look. The lo-res image will show jaggy edges that you don't see in
> the hi-res.

Hi John,

Sorry, but that's not how it works!

All that happens in a screen capture is that the capturing software 
copies the contents of all or part of the graphics card RAM to a file. 
"Resolution" is irrelevant at that stage, because you are only copying a 
fixed number of pixels.  Those pixels are displayed by your monitor 
according to the graphics card resolution setting, which determines the 
image dimensions *on your particular screen*, and they are (later) sent 
to a printer driver with an instruction on how closely to space the 
corresponding ink dots.  But none of that changes the number of pixels 
in either the graphics card RAM or the resulting file.

Also, your test doesn't apply to screen captures.
Illustrator is a vector program, not a raster program.  When you
export the vector drawings to tiff, they get rasterized (converted from
mathematical formulas with no associated quantity of pixels to files 
containing a finite number of pixels).  If you export at low resolution, 
then Illustrator will create a file with fewer pixels than if you export 
at higher resolution.  This export operation is completely different 
from a screen capture, which is a raster image with a fixed number of 
pixels.

"Jaggies" are unavoidable when rectangular pixels are used to create 
angled lines.  They're just less visible with higher-res files, though 
they are still there.

HTH!

-- 
Stuart Rogers
Technical Communicator
Phoenix Geophysics Limited
Toronto, ON, Canada
+1 (416) 491-7340 x 325

srogers phoenix-geophysics com

If it makes things work more easily, why isn't it called lubrican?

Distiller 7 missing fonts

[Shuttleworth, Roger]

Hello All



(sigh) I know this question must have been asked dozens of times.



Using FrameMaker 7.1 p116 and Acrobat Professional (Distiller) 7.0.7. Windows 
XP SP2.



I try to create a PDF from FrameMaker using File > Save as PDF. Distiller fires 
up but fails to produce a PDF (because of my settings) with the
following message:



%%[ ProductName: Distiller ]%%

%%[ Error: GillSans not found. Font cannot be embedded. ]%%

%%[ Error: invalidfont; OffendingCommand: findfont ]%%



The GillSans it refers to is installed on my system using ATM Lite. It's a Type 
1 PostScript produced by Adobe, file name GN___.pfm and .pfb. There
are a number of related fonts - the italic, bold, etc.



In Distiller the font locations are set to:



C:\PSFONTS\PFM\

C:\Windows\Fonts\

C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Acrobat 7.0\Resource\Font\



And a couple of other places.



In Distiller's Adobe PDF Settings the Embed all fonts option is checked, as is 
Subset embedded fonts when percent...is less than 100%. And "When
embedding fails" is set to Cancel job.



I removed and reinstalled the fonts from the original disk using ATM, but the 
message still appears. In FrameMaker the paragraph formats using these
fonts are OK - i.e. the font is not greyed in the paragraph designer.



Any ideas?





Roger Shuttleworth

Technical Publications

TVWorks Canada, Inc.

150 Dufferin Avenue

London, Ontario

N6A 5N6

Canada

Tel. 519 963-4368

www.tvworks.com

Distiller 7 missing fonts

[Mike Wickham]

> Some fonts are restricted from being embedded by the font foundry. It is
> an attribute of the font files. This prevents them from being extracted
> from the PDF by a third party and reused.

Except that Adobe fonts all permit embedding, and he said he had an Adobe 
font. (Maybe it was different with really old versions of the font?)

Mike Wickham

"unavailable fonts" problem: URGENT

[Bill Swallow]

1. File > Preferences > General
2. Deselect "remember missing font names"
3. Open the file.
4. Click OK to font substitutions.
5. Save and close the file.


On Feb 6, 2008 3:10 PM, Brewster, Christopher C
 wrote:
> I'm trying to make a PDF version of a book. Just one file, the title
> page, causes a problem about using unavailable fonts, which makes the
> PDF operation fail. When I open the title page file, I change all the
> text to a font that's available, then save and close the file. But when
> I reopen it, I get the same message, which means the PDF operation will
> fail again. Is there a way to convince FM that the fonts are OK? Or tell
> it to use a default?
>
>
>
> This PDF is urgently needed, so I appreciate any help.
>
> Christopher C. Brewster
> Multimedia Design Engineer
> Technical Documents and Training
> Lockheed Martin MS2
> 651-456-4597 Eagan office
> 612-280-2233 cell
> 763-475-0477 home
>
>
>
> ___
>
>
> You are currently subscribed to Framers as techcommdood at gmail.com.
>
> Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
> or visit 
> http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/techcommdood%40gmail.com
>
> Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
> http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
>



-- 
Bill Swallow
HATT List Owner
WWP-Users List Owner
Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter
STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager
http://techcommdood.blogspot.com

page layout for a double-wide table

[Stuart Rogers]

Ben Hechter wrote:
> Just curious, has anyone attempted a 2-page master page layout for a
> lengthy double-wide table? Beyond a compressed landscape format, all
> I can come up with at this point is some sort of artificial 11x17
> page size, but am stumped further...


If I understand correctly, you want a single table to span facing 8.5x11 
pages.  If the table is the only thing on only one pair of pages, here's 
an idea that is cumbersome to set up and maintain, but might work.

Create the table on an 11x17 landscape layout in its own file.

In your working file, on a left page, create an anchored frame the same 
size and position as your text frame.  Within it, create a text frame of 
the same dimensions and position.  Put the insertion point in that text 
frame and import the table file as an inset.  You now have the left half 
of your table on a left page, cropped by the anchored frame.

Repeat the process on the right page.  Select the imported table on that 
page and set its Alignment in the Table Designer to Right.  (This is an 
override; just Apply, don't Update All.)  You now have the right half of 
the table on a right page, cropped by the anchored frame.

Obviously, you'll have to do some playing around with a central table 
column with no borders or content, to accommodate the book's gutter. 
Also, the autonumbering, if it exists, will increment on the right page. 
  You might have to fake the table numbering for your TOC by putting a 
titled empty table above the real one, and autonumber the real one with 
its own series label that is not used elsewhere, so as not to disrupt 
the numbering of other tables in the book.

Caveat: This suggestion is not called "lubrican".  ;-)

-- 
Stuart Rogers
Technical Communicator
Phoenix Geophysics Limited
Toronto, ON, Canada
+1 (416) 491-7340 x 325

srogers phoenix-geophysics com

If it makes things work more easily, why isn't it called lubrican?

FM8 now works for us

[Austin Meredith]

We are happy to be able to report that, with the recent Version 
8.0p273 patch, FM8 now works for us here at our Kouroo Contexture, 
the way it should. To see how it works fine now, enabling hypertext 
buttons between Acrobat documents on the internet, click on 
http://www.kouroo.info/kouroo/transclusions/16/80DECADE/89/1689_ShepardsConverts.pdf
 

Re: Question about applying and removing character tags in FM6.0

[Peter Gold]

Hi, Maxwell:

I'd suggest a slight variation on Clint's suggestion:

Select the affected range of text, open the character designer, click
the Commands button, choose Set Window To As-Is, THEN disable Change
Bars and click apply. The Designers pick up text attributes from the
selection; setting all to as-is first, is a precaution to retain all
local formatting - applied with or without tags - in the selection.
Regards,

Peter
___
Peter Gold
KnowHow ProServices

On Feb 6, 2008 2:46 PM, maxwell.hoffmann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a basic, really dumb question about character tags.  (Think I
> know the answer, but need to check.)
>
>
>
> If I apply a character tag for [Change Bars] to several paragraphs, (and
> the char tag is defined all "as is" settings, except for change bar), is
> there anyway to remove the character tag and not wipe out format
> overrides (e.g  [bold] and [emphasis]) character tags on the sentence
> level?
>
>
>
> This is in unstructured FrameMaker, V6.0. I know that the traditional
> way to get rid of a character tag is F8 or [Default Para Tag]. I am
> checking to see if there is some way to remove just one tag and not
> interfere with other format overrides. (I think the answer is there is
> no way.)
>
>
>
> Maxwell Hoffmann
> Production Lead
> Welocalize
>
> Tel. 503.274.2211
> Mob. 301.693.7728
> Fax: 503.274.2611
> www.welocalize.com 
>
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

"unavailable fonts" problem: URGENT

[Brewster, Christopher C]

I'm trying to make a PDF version of a book. Just one file, the title
page, causes a problem about using unavailable fonts, which makes the
PDF operation fail. When I open the title page file, I change all the
text to a font that's available, then save and close the file. But when
I reopen it, I get the same message, which means the PDF operation will
fail again. Is there a way to convince FM that the fonts are OK? Or tell
it to use a default?



This PDF is urgently needed, so I appreciate any help.

Christopher C. Brewster 
Multimedia Design Engineer
Technical Documents and Training
Lockheed Martin MS2 
651-456-4597 Eagan office
612-280-2233 cell 
763-475-0477 home

Duplicating a two-page section

[Stuart Rogers]

Brewster, Christopher C wrote:
> I'm learning FM as I go, out of necessity. I need to make an alternative
> version of a procedure, so I need a copy of the original appearing just
> after it, which I'll modify. 

Should be dead easy.

The procedure contains a linked graphic.

Makes no difference.

> Simply copying a page didn't work because its contents were inserted
> into another page. 

No clue what you mean here.

So I used Special > Add Disconnected Pages. It's OK
> to be disconnected because each procedure starts at the top of a page.

No, I don't think this is what you want.  Disconnected pages will run 
you into maintenance headaches later on.  You want to keep all your 
pages in a single connected flow, I'm sure.

> The text copied in fine, but the linked graphic needs to appear at the
> top, above the heading. FM won't let me put it there.

Yes it will.  You need to find out what the properties are of the 
anchored frame containing the graphic.  If the anchor is in a text 
paragraph, set the frame's position to Top of Column.  (My preferred way 
to anchor frames is to put them in their own dedicated and otherwise 
empty pgf, which can then have its own position and spacing properties.)

> Any solution to the above appreciated, or just an easier way to copy two
> pages and insert the copy after the original.

Select the material you want to copy and press Ctrl-C; position the 
insertion point where you want the duplicate to appear and press Ctrl-V. 
  Use the Paragraph Designer to set the pagination properties of your 
procedures' first paragraph to Start At Top of Page.

(If you still run into problems, send me your file off list and I'll 
sort it out for you.)

HTH,

-- 
Stuart Rogers
Technical Communicator
Phoenix Geophysics Limited
Toronto, ON, Canada
+1 (416) 491-7340 x 325

srogers phoenix-geophysics com

If it makes things work more easily, why isn't it called lubrican?

Re: Distiller 7 missing fonts

[Mike Wickham]

> Some fonts are restricted from being embedded by the font foundry. It is
> an attribute of the font files. This prevents them from being extracted
> from the PDF by a third party and reused.

Except that Adobe fonts all permit embedding, and he said he had an Adobe 
font. (Maybe it was different with really old versions of the font?)

Mike Wickham


___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Working with Images

[Stuart Rogers]

John Sgammato wrote:
> ...

> Note that with SnagIt you can opt to capture the image at other
> resolutions, so you need not change anything in FM. I capture images
> as 200dpi TIFFs, and then import them at 200dpi in my books. I go to
> print, PDF, and online help from a single set of screenshots.

John, your workflow is appropriate, but you're not quite correct on why.

You are not capturing the image "at other resolutions," or really at any 
resolution.  You are capturing a specific number of pixels.  At the time 
of capture, they are *displayed* at your screen resolution (pixels per 
inch, ppi; not dpi).  Put that captured image on another screen with 
different graphics card resolution, and the identical number of pixels 
will be displayed on that screen, with different physical dimensions 
because that screen positions the pixels closer or farther apart 
(different number of ppi).  None of that matters when it comes to 
putting the image in FM.

When you tell SnagIt or FM or Photoshop or any other program that an 
image is xxx dpi, you are simply giving it an instruction to pass along 
to the print device that it should place the dots 1/xxx inch apart.  If 
you tell SnagIt you want the image to be 200 dpi, it tells FM the same 
thing; when you import "at 200dpi", you're telling FM the same thing. 
FM renders an approximation of that on screen, as well as passing the 
instruction on to the print driver.  The image that you captured, unless 
manipulated by some sort of interpolation, can only contain the number 
of pixels that formed the original object on screen.  Telling SnagIt 
200dpi or 50dpi does not change the number of pixels or the size of the 
file; it only changes the distance between dots when printed (and the 
size of FM's on-screen approximation).

Best regards,

-- 
Stuart Rogers
Technical Communicator
Phoenix Geophysics Limited
Toronto, ON, Canada
+1 (416) 491-7340 x 325

srogers phoenix-geophysics com

If it makes things work more easily, why isn't it called lubrican?

RE: Distiller 7 missing fonts

[rebecca officer]

Hi Roger

I've got no idea what could be wrong with your font, but just thought I'd 
comment that we use that font and have no problems with embedding it.

Our font files are dated 14/10/1999. Using FM7.0 and Win XP SP2.

Did it work in the past for you, or is this the first time you've tried to use 
GillSans?

Cheers, Rebecca

>>> "Owen, Clint" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 7/02/08 10:10 >>>
Some fonts are restricted from being embedded by the font foundry. It is
an attribute of the font files. This prevents them from being extracted
from the PDF by a third party and reused.


Clint Owen 
Technical Publications
Crane Aerospace & Electronics 
425-743-8674


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shuttleworth,
Roger
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:00 PM
To: framers@lists.frameusers.com 
Subject: Distiller 7 missing fonts

Hello All

 

(sigh) I know this question must have been asked dozens of times.

 

Using FrameMaker 7.1 p116 and Acrobat Professional (Distiller) 7.0.7.
Windows XP SP2.

 

I try to create a PDF from FrameMaker using File > Save as PDF.
Distiller fires up but fails to produce a PDF (because of my settings)
with the following message:

 

%%[ ProductName: Distiller ]%%

%%[ Error: GillSans not found. Font cannot be embedded. ]%%

%%[ Error: invalidfont; OffendingCommand: findfont ]%%

 

The GillSans it refers to is installed on my system using ATM Lite. It's
a Type 1 PostScript produced by Adobe, file name GN___.pfm and .pfb.
There are a number of related fonts - the italic, bold, etc.

 

In Distiller the font locations are set to:

 

C:\PSFONTS\PFM\

C:\Windows\Fonts\

C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Acrobat 7.0\Resource\Font\

 

And a couple of other places.

 

In Distiller's Adobe PDF Settings the Embed all fonts option is checked,
as is Subset embedded fonts when percent...is less than 100%. And "When
embedding fails" is set to Cancel job.

 

I removed and reinstalled the fonts from the original disk using ATM,
but the message still appears. In FrameMaker the paragraph formats using
these fonts are OK - i.e. the font is not greyed in the paragraph
designer.

 

Any ideas?

 

 

Roger Shuttleworth

Technical Publications

TVWorks Canada, Inc.

150 Dufferin Avenue

London, Ontario

N6A 5N6

Canada

Tel. 519 963-4368

www.tvworks.com 

 

___



NOTICE: This message contains privileged and confidential
information intended only for the use of the addressee
named above. If you are not the intended recipient of
this message you are hereby notified that you must not
disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it.
If you have received this message in error please
notify Allied Telesis Labs Ltd immediately.
Any views expressed in this message are those of the
individual sender, except where the sender has the
authority to issue and specifically states them to
be the views of Allied Telesis Labs.
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Internal Error

[Shmuel Wolfson]

I occasionally have the dreaded "Internal Error" after a search in FM, 
then FM closes. Would extra RAM help? I have 1 GB of RAM now.

-- 
Regards,
Shmuel Wolfson

RE: Distiller 7 missing fonts

[Alan Litchfield]

Roger,

Have you tried printing to pdf, using the Adobe PDF driver? I would suggest
printing to a postscript file and manually Distilling it so you can see what
is going on at stage.

Also,...

>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shuttleworth,
> Roger
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:00 PM
> To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Distiller 7 missing fonts
>
>
> Using FrameMaker 7.1 p116 and Acrobat Professional (Distiller) 7.0.7.
> Windows XP SP2.
>
>
>
> I try to create a PDF from FrameMaker using File > Save as PDF.
> Distiller fires up but fails to produce a PDF (because of my settings)
> with the following message:
>
>
>
> %%[ ProductName: Distiller ]%%
>
> %%[ Error: GillSans not found. Font cannot be embedded. ]%%
>
> %%[ Error: invalidfont; OffendingCommand: findfont ]%%
>
>
>
> The GillSans it refers to is installed on my system using ATM Lite. It's
> a Type 1 PostScript produced by Adobe, file name GN___.pfm and .pfb.
> There are a number of related fonts - the italic, bold, etc.

I am not really up on Windows stuff but I thought you didn't have to use ATM
to install fonts anymore, least ways I haven't since NT. The Fonts Control
Panel provides an very nice interface for managing your fonts. It may be that
ATM is putting the postscript files into a directory that Distiller is unaware
of.


> In Distiller the font locations are set to:
>
>
> C:\PSFONTS\PFM\
>
> C:\Windows\Fonts\
>
> C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Acrobat 7.0\Resource\Font\
>

Well they look fairly standard :/

> And a couple of other places.
>

More than likely.

>
>
> In Distiller's Adobe PDF Settings the Embed all fonts option is checked,
> as is Subset embedded fonts when percent...is less than 100%. And "When
> embedding fails" is set to Cancel job.
>

Have you Tried setting it to replace with another font? To confirm the file
will print without it?

> I removed and reinstalled the fonts from the original disk using ATM,
> but the message still appears. In FrameMaker the paragraph formats using
> these fonts are OK - i.e. the font is not greyed in the paragraph
> designer.
>

Note the comment above.

Cheers
Alan

-- 
Alan Litchfield MBus (Hons), MNZCS
AlphaByte
PO Box 1941, Auckland
http://www.alphabyte.co.nz

___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Re: Working with Images

[Stuart Rogers]

John Sgammato wrote:
> When you capture a 96dpi image at higher resolution, you will never
> see detail that isn't there (of course) but you can do more with the
> image because your OWN image of the image is capable of showing
> greater resolution. You can look at it as if your high-res image
> capture dices the existing image into smaller pieces. As an extreme
> example, consider an original image of alternating 1-inch black and
> white elements along a line at 10 dpi. Capture that image at 100 dpi
> and you really have 10 times as many 0.1-inch elements to work with,
> all faithful in location, dimension, and color to the original. If
> you need to rotate or stretch or manipulate the image in any way, or
> if any of your processes cause the image to lose resolution, the new
> hi-res image will be more forgiving. Likewise if you print the image,
> the printer is limited by its own resolution - the higher-resolution
> image can help to compensate.
> 
> This is easy to test for your self: in Illustrator (or similar)
> generate a black square and inside it a white circle or diamond.
> Repeat at smaller intervals until you get bored. Save as .ai, then
> export to .tiff twice. For the first select 96dpi and call it
> lo-res.tiff, and for the second export at 400dpi and call it
> hi-res.tiff. Then import them side-by side into FM and see how they
> look. The lo-res image will show jaggy edges that you don't see in
> the hi-res.

Hi John,

Sorry, but that's not how it works!

All that happens in a screen capture is that the capturing software 
copies the contents of all or part of the graphics card RAM to a file. 
"Resolution" is irrelevant at that stage, because you are only copying a 
fixed number of pixels.  Those pixels are displayed by your monitor 
according to the graphics card resolution setting, which determines the 
image dimensions *on your particular screen*, and they are (later) sent 
to a printer driver with an instruction on how closely to space the 
corresponding ink dots.  But none of that changes the number of pixels 
in either the graphics card RAM or the resulting file.

Also, your test doesn't apply to screen captures.
Illustrator is a vector program, not a raster program.  When you
export the vector drawings to tiff, they get rasterized (converted from
mathematical formulas with no associated quantity of pixels to files 
containing a finite number of pixels).  If you export at low resolution, 
then Illustrator will create a file with fewer pixels than if you export 
at higher resolution.  This export operation is completely different 
from a screen capture, which is a raster image with a fixed number of 
pixels.

"Jaggies" are unavoidable when rectangular pixels are used to create 
angled lines.  They're just less visible with higher-res files, though 
they are still there.

HTH!

-- 
Stuart Rogers
Technical Communicator
Phoenix Geophysics Limited
Toronto, ON, Canada
+1 (416) 491-7340 x 325

srogers phoenix-geophysics com

If it makes things work more easily, why isn't it called lubrican?

___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: Distiller 7 missing fonts

[Owen, Clint]

Some fonts are restricted from being embedded by the font foundry. It is
an attribute of the font files. This prevents them from being extracted
from the PDF by a third party and reused.


Clint Owen 
Technical Publications
Crane Aerospace & Electronics 
425-743-8674


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shuttleworth,
Roger
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:00 PM
To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
Subject: Distiller 7 missing fonts

Hello All

 

(sigh) I know this question must have been asked dozens of times.

 

Using FrameMaker 7.1 p116 and Acrobat Professional (Distiller) 7.0.7.
Windows XP SP2.

 

I try to create a PDF from FrameMaker using File > Save as PDF.
Distiller fires up but fails to produce a PDF (because of my settings)
with the following message:

 

%%[ ProductName: Distiller ]%%

%%[ Error: GillSans not found. Font cannot be embedded. ]%%

%%[ Error: invalidfont; OffendingCommand: findfont ]%%

 

The GillSans it refers to is installed on my system using ATM Lite. It's
a Type 1 PostScript produced by Adobe, file name GN___.pfm and .pfb.
There are a number of related fonts - the italic, bold, etc.

 

In Distiller the font locations are set to:

 

C:\PSFONTS\PFM\

C:\Windows\Fonts\

C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Acrobat 7.0\Resource\Font\

 

And a couple of other places.

 

In Distiller's Adobe PDF Settings the Embed all fonts option is checked,
as is Subset embedded fonts when percent...is less than 100%. And "When
embedding fails" is set to Cancel job.

 

I removed and reinstalled the fonts from the original disk using ATM,
but the message still appears. In FrameMaker the paragraph formats using
these fonts are OK - i.e. the font is not greyed in the paragraph
designer.

 

Any ideas?

 

 

Roger Shuttleworth

Technical Publications

TVWorks Canada, Inc.

150 Dufferin Avenue

London, Ontario

N6A 5N6

Canada

Tel. 519 963-4368

www.tvworks.com

 

___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/clint.owen%40craneae
rospace.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
We value your opinion!  How may we serve you better?
Please click the below survey link to tell us how we are doing.

http://www.craneae.com/surveys/satisfaction.htm

Your feedback is of the utmost importance to us! Thank you for your time!


##
Attention: 
The information contained in this email message may be privileged and is 
confidential information intended only for the use of the recipient, or any 
employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or copying of this information is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful.

If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and destroy the original message and all attachments from your 
electronic files.


This email was scanned and cleared by MailMarshal.
##
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Distiller 7 missing fonts

[Owen, Clint]

Some fonts are restricted from being embedded by the font foundry. It is
an attribute of the font files. This prevents them from being extracted
from the PDF by a third party and reused.


Clint Owen 
Technical Publications
Crane Aerospace & Electronics 
425-743-8674


-Original Message-
From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
[mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Shuttleworth,
Roger
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:00 PM
To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
Subject: Distiller 7 missing fonts

Hello All



(sigh) I know this question must have been asked dozens of times.



Using FrameMaker 7.1 p116 and Acrobat Professional (Distiller) 7.0.7.
Windows XP SP2.



I try to create a PDF from FrameMaker using File > Save as PDF.
Distiller fires up but fails to produce a PDF (because of my settings)
with the following message:



%%[ ProductName: Distiller ]%%

%%[ Error: GillSans not found. Font cannot be embedded. ]%%

%%[ Error: invalidfont; OffendingCommand: findfont ]%%



The GillSans it refers to is installed on my system using ATM Lite. It's
a Type 1 PostScript produced by Adobe, file name GN___.pfm and .pfb.
There are a number of related fonts - the italic, bold, etc.



In Distiller the font locations are set to:



C:\PSFONTS\PFM\

C:\Windows\Fonts\

C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Acrobat 7.0\Resource\Font\



And a couple of other places.



In Distiller's Adobe PDF Settings the Embed all fonts option is checked,
as is Subset embedded fonts when percent...is less than 100%. And "When
embedding fails" is set to Cancel job.



I removed and reinstalled the fonts from the original disk using ATM,
but the message still appears. In FrameMaker the paragraph formats using
these fonts are OK - i.e. the font is not greyed in the paragraph
designer.



Any ideas?





Roger Shuttleworth

Technical Publications

TVWorks Canada, Inc.

150 Dufferin Avenue

London, Ontario

N6A 5N6

Canada

Tel. 519 963-4368

www.tvworks.com



___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as
Clint.Owen at craneaerospace.com.

Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/clint.owen%40craneae
rospace.com

Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
We value your opinion!  How may we serve you better?
Please click the below survey link to tell us how we are doing.

http://www.craneae.com/surveys/satisfaction.htm

Your feedback is of the utmost importance to us! Thank you for your time!


##
Attention: 
The information contained in this email message may be privileged and is 
confidential information intended only for the use of the recipient, or any 
employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or copying of this information is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful.

If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and destroy the original message and all attachments from your 
electronic files.


This email was scanned and cleared by MailMarshal.
##

Working with Images

[Peter Gold]

I don't think I've seen a mention about the variation of screen-pixel
size among different monitor brands and models. I realize that
although a screen pixel that's .35mm square, and one that's .25mm
square create different on-screen image sizes and granularity for the
same image, say 100px x 100px, screen-pixel size doesn't affect a
printed image. However, screen-pixel size does affect the appearance
of the size of the original image, and of a PDF of that image.

Isn't it as important to standardize on the screen-pixel size of
monitors in a work flow, just as it is to employ standard screen
calibration, and standard lighting for viewing printed output?

(No rants were harmed during the creation of this question.)

Regards,

Peter
___
Peter Gold
KnowHow ProServices

Distiller 7 missing fonts

[Shuttleworth, Roger]

Hello All

 

(sigh) I know this question must have been asked dozens of times.

 

Using FrameMaker 7.1 p116 and Acrobat Professional (Distiller) 7.0.7. Windows 
XP SP2.

 

I try to create a PDF from FrameMaker using File > Save as PDF. Distiller fires 
up but fails to produce a PDF (because of my settings) with the
following message:

 

%%[ ProductName: Distiller ]%%

%%[ Error: GillSans not found. Font cannot be embedded. ]%%

%%[ Error: invalidfont; OffendingCommand: findfont ]%%

 

The GillSans it refers to is installed on my system using ATM Lite. It's a Type 
1 PostScript produced by Adobe, file name GN___.pfm and .pfb. There
are a number of related fonts - the italic, bold, etc.

 

In Distiller the font locations are set to:

 

C:\PSFONTS\PFM\

C:\Windows\Fonts\

C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Acrobat 7.0\Resource\Font\

 

And a couple of other places.

 

In Distiller's Adobe PDF Settings the Embed all fonts option is checked, as is 
Subset embedded fonts when percent...is less than 100%. And "When
embedding fails" is set to Cancel job.

 

I removed and reinstalled the fonts from the original disk using ATM, but the 
message still appears. In FrameMaker the paragraph formats using these
fonts are OK - i.e. the font is not greyed in the paragraph designer.

 

Any ideas?

 

 

Roger Shuttleworth

Technical Publications

TVWorks Canada, Inc.

150 Dufferin Avenue

London, Ontario

N6A 5N6

Canada

Tel. 519 963-4368

www.tvworks.com

 

___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

keep with next para

[Stuart Rogers]

Graeme R Forbes wrote:
> I have a proof consisting in a sequence of lines across a page, each 
> a paragraph, and  each line separated from the next by a shallow 
> anchored frame that contains a separator line. Each line/para is set 
> to keep with the next one since the whole proof must display on the 
> same page. However, in order to get one of the lines to fit across 
> the page, I had to use a soft return, and FM allows the proof to 
> break across the page at the soft return. Is there some way of 
> preventing this while retaining the soft return, or will I have to 
> use two paragraphs?
> 

Chiming in late here, but did you ever get a resolution to this?

I don't fully understand how inserting a soft return caused a single 
line to fit across the page -- surely that must have resulted in two lines??

At any rate, I would use the Frame Below property to add the separator 
line, and I would specify a large number of Widow/Orphan lines on the 
pagination tab.  My test document in FM 7.0 does not break a pgf at a 
soft return with Orphans set to 5, so I think that would work with your 
  one or two line situation.

HTH,

-- 
Stuart Rogers
Technical Communicator
Phoenix Geophysics Limited
Toronto, ON, Canada
+1 (416) 491-7340 x 325

srogers phoenix-geophysics com

If it makes things work more easily, why isn't it called lubrican?

RE: Question about applying and removing character tags in FM6.0

[Owen, Clint]

Maxwell,

Just select all the paragraphs that contain the change bar attribute,
then go to the character designer (ctrl D), uncheck the change bar
attribute, then click "Apply". This will remove the change bar and leave
everything else. 

We always apply and remove change bars manually; it's easier to control
than the automatic method.


Clint Owen 
Technical Publications
Crane Aerospace & Electronics 
425-743-8674


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
maxwell.hoffmann
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:46 PM
To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
Subject: Question about applying and removing character tags in FM6.0

I have a basic, really dumb question about character tags.  (Think I
know the answer, but need to check.)

 

If I apply a character tag for [Change Bars] to several paragraphs, (and
the char tag is defined all "as is" settings, except for change bar), is
there anyway to remove the character tag and not wipe out format
overrides (e.g  [bold] and [emphasis]) character tags on the sentence
level?

 

This is in unstructured FrameMaker, V6.0. I know that the traditional
way to get rid of a character tag is F8 or [Default Para Tag]. I am
checking to see if there is some way to remove just one tag and not
interfere with other format overrides. (I think the answer is there is
no way.)

 

Maxwell Hoffmann
Production Lead
Welocalize

Tel. 503.274.2211
Mob. 301.693.7728
Fax: 503.274.2611
www.welocalize.com  

 

___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/clint.owen%40craneae
rospace.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
We value your opinion!  How may we serve you better?
Please click the below survey link to tell us how we are doing.

http://www.craneae.com/surveys/satisfaction.htm

Your feedback is of the utmost importance to us! Thank you for your time!


##
Attention: 
The information contained in this email message may be privileged and is 
confidential information intended only for the use of the recipient, or any 
employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or copying of this information is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful.

If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and destroy the original message and all attachments from your 
electronic files.


This email was scanned and cleared by MailMarshal.
##
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Question about applying and removing character tags in FM6.0

[Owen, Clint]

Maxwell,

Just select all the paragraphs that contain the change bar attribute,
then go to the character designer (ctrl D), uncheck the change bar
attribute, then click "Apply". This will remove the change bar and leave
everything else. 

We always apply and remove change bars manually; it's easier to control
than the automatic method.


Clint Owen 
Technical Publications
Crane Aerospace & Electronics 
425-743-8674


-Original Message-
From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
[mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
maxwell.hoffmann
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:46 PM
To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
Subject: Question about applying and removing character tags in FM6.0

I have a basic, really dumb question about character tags.  (Think I
know the answer, but need to check.)



If I apply a character tag for [Change Bars] to several paragraphs, (and
the char tag is defined all "as is" settings, except for change bar), is
there anyway to remove the character tag and not wipe out format
overrides (e.g  [bold] and [emphasis]) character tags on the sentence
level?



This is in unstructured FrameMaker, V6.0. I know that the traditional
way to get rid of a character tag is F8 or [Default Para Tag]. I am
checking to see if there is some way to remove just one tag and not
interfere with other format overrides. (I think the answer is there is
no way.)



Maxwell Hoffmann
Production Lead
Welocalize

Tel. 503.274.2211
Mob. 301.693.7728
Fax: 503.274.2611
www.welocalize.com  



___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as
Clint.Owen at craneaerospace.com.

Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/clint.owen%40craneae
rospace.com

Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
We value your opinion!  How may we serve you better?
Please click the below survey link to tell us how we are doing.

http://www.craneae.com/surveys/satisfaction.htm

Your feedback is of the utmost importance to us! Thank you for your time!


##
Attention: 
The information contained in this email message may be privileged and is 
confidential information intended only for the use of the recipient, or any 
employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or copying of this information is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful.

If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and destroy the original message and all attachments from your 
electronic files.


This email was scanned and cleared by MailMarshal.
##

Question about applying and removing character tags in FM6.0

[maxwell.hoffmann]

I have a basic, really dumb question about character tags.  (Think I
know the answer, but need to check.)

 

If I apply a character tag for [Change Bars] to several paragraphs, (and
the char tag is defined all "as is" settings, except for change bar), is
there anyway to remove the character tag and not wipe out format
overrides (e.g  [bold] and [emphasis]) character tags on the sentence
level?

 

This is in unstructured FrameMaker, V6.0. I know that the traditional
way to get rid of a character tag is F8 or [Default Para Tag]. I am
checking to see if there is some way to remove just one tag and not
interfere with other format overrides. (I think the answer is there is
no way.)

 

Maxwell Hoffmann
Production Lead
Welocalize

Tel. 503.274.2211
Mob. 301.693.7728
Fax: 503.274.2611
www.welocalize.com  

 

___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Question about applying and removing character tags in FM6.0

[maxwell.hoffmann]

I have a basic, really dumb question about character tags.  (Think I
know the answer, but need to check.)



If I apply a character tag for [Change Bars] to several paragraphs, (and
the char tag is defined all "as is" settings, except for change bar), is
there anyway to remove the character tag and not wipe out format
overrides (e.g  [bold] and [emphasis]) character tags on the sentence
level?



This is in unstructured FrameMaker, V6.0. I know that the traditional
way to get rid of a character tag is F8 or [Default Para Tag]. I am
checking to see if there is some way to remove just one tag and not
interfere with other format overrides. (I think the answer is there is
no way.)



Maxwell Hoffmann
Production Lead
Welocalize

Tel. 503.274.2211
Mob. 301.693.7728
Fax: 503.274.2611
www.welocalize.com  

Revising Help topics created in WebWorks

[Yves Barbion]

Hi Rebecca,

if you only need to change the text in the footer, the easiest (and 
cheapest) way is to open all the HTML files in a plain text editor and 
do a global search and replace there. For example, you could use EditPad 
Lite for this: http://www.editpadpro.com/editpadlite.html

Thus, you don't have to upgrade WebWorks (or FrameMaker).

Good luck.

Yves Barbion 
Documentation Architect
Adobe-Certified FrameMaker Instructor


Scripto bvba
Asselsstraat 65
9031 Gent
Belgium
T: +32 494 12 01 89
F: +32 9 366 50 23
BTW (VAT) BE 0886.192.394
skype: yves.barbion




Rebecca Martin wrote:
> I have a legacy Help project that was created in Frame7.1 and published via
> Webworks Publisher 2003 for FrameMaker. We need to make changes to the
> footer in every topic, but have been unable to find the project file for
> editing. I was told we should make the changes in Frame and republish the
> help with Webworks. Unfortunately, it looks like we cannot make changes to
> the current project unless we use the WebWorks Publisher Professional
> Edition 7.0. (That would require us to upgrade, but we're not sure the
> current version of FM would work with it.)
>
>  
>
> Is that a correct assumption?
>
>  
>
> Is there a project file we should be looking for? We have found .wdt and
> .wfp files, none of which open the project.
>
>  
>
> Any advice on how to proceed?
>
>  
>
> Rebecca R. Martin
>
> Professional Services Manager
>
> Radcom, Inc.
>
> 1696 Georgetown Rd., Unit A
>
> Hudson, OH 44236
>
> 330-650-4777, X 109
>
> www.radcomservices.com
>
>  
>
> ___
>
>
> You are currently subscribed to Framers as yves.barbion at gmail.com.
>
> Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
> framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
> or visit 
> http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/yves.barbion%40gmail.com
>
> Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
> http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
>
>   

Re: "unavailable fonts" problem: URGENT

[Bill Swallow]

1. File > Preferences > General
2. Deselect "remember missing font names"
3. Open the file.
4. Click OK to font substitutions.
5. Save and close the file.


On Feb 6, 2008 3:10 PM, Brewster, Christopher C
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm trying to make a PDF version of a book. Just one file, the title
> page, causes a problem about using unavailable fonts, which makes the
> PDF operation fail. When I open the title page file, I change all the
> text to a font that's available, then save and close the file. But when
> I reopen it, I get the same message, which means the PDF operation will
> fail again. Is there a way to convince FM that the fonts are OK? Or tell
> it to use a default?
>
>
>
> This PDF is urgently needed, so I appreciate any help.
>
> Christopher C. Brewster
> Multimedia Design Engineer
> Technical Documents and Training
> Lockheed Martin MS2
> 651-456-4597 Eagan office
> 612-280-2233 cell
> 763-475-0477 home
>
>
>
> ___
>
>
> You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> or visit 
> http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/techcommdood%40gmail.com
>
> Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
> http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
>



-- 
Bill Swallow
HATT List Owner
WWP-Users List Owner
Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter
STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager
http://techcommdood.blogspot.com
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Re: page layout for a double-wide table

[Stuart Rogers]

Ben Hechter wrote:
> Just curious, has anyone attempted a 2-page master page layout for a
> lengthy double-wide table? Beyond a compressed landscape format, all
> I can come up with at this point is some sort of artificial 11x17
> page size, but am stumped further...


If I understand correctly, you want a single table to span facing 8.5x11 
pages.  If the table is the only thing on only one pair of pages, here's 
an idea that is cumbersome to set up and maintain, but might work.

Create the table on an 11x17 landscape layout in its own file.

In your working file, on a left page, create an anchored frame the same 
size and position as your text frame.  Within it, create a text frame of 
the same dimensions and position.  Put the insertion point in that text 
frame and import the table file as an inset.  You now have the left half 
of your table on a left page, cropped by the anchored frame.

Repeat the process on the right page.  Select the imported table on that 
page and set its Alignment in the Table Designer to Right.  (This is an 
override; just Apply, don't Update All.)  You now have the right half of 
the table on a right page, cropped by the anchored frame.

Obviously, you'll have to do some playing around with a central table 
column with no borders or content, to accommodate the book's gutter. 
Also, the autonumbering, if it exists, will increment on the right page. 
  You might have to fake the table numbering for your TOC by putting a 
titled empty table above the real one, and autonumber the real one with 
its own series label that is not used elsewhere, so as not to disrupt 
the numbering of other tables in the book.

Caveat: This suggestion is not called "lubrican".  ;-)

-- 
Stuart Rogers
Technical Communicator
Phoenix Geophysics Limited
Toronto, ON, Canada
+1 (416) 491-7340 x 325

srogers phoenix-geophysics com

If it makes things work more easily, why isn't it called lubrican?
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

"unavailable fonts" problem: URGENT

[Brewster, Christopher C]

I'm trying to make a PDF version of a book. Just one file, the title
page, causes a problem about using unavailable fonts, which makes the
PDF operation fail. When I open the title page file, I change all the
text to a font that's available, then save and close the file. But when
I reopen it, I get the same message, which means the PDF operation will
fail again. Is there a way to convince FM that the fonts are OK? Or tell
it to use a default?

 

This PDF is urgently needed, so I appreciate any help.

Christopher C. Brewster 
Multimedia Design Engineer
Technical Documents and Training
Lockheed Martin MS2 
651-456-4597 Eagan office
612-280-2233 cell 
763-475-0477 home

 

___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

FM8 now works for us

[Austin Meredith]

We are happy to be able to report that, with the recent Version 
8.0p273 patch, FM8 now works for us here at our Kouroo Contexture, 
the way it should. To see how it works fine now, enabling hypertext 
buttons between Acrobat documents on the internet, click on 
http://www.kouroo.info/kouroo/transclusions/16/80DECADE/89/1689_ShepardsConverts.pdf
 


___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: Working with Images

[Dennis Brunnenmeyer]

Rick...

You are very correct about my brashness. My apologies to all of you. 
I was anxious to try and squelch some misconceptions and got carried 
away. David Creamer was particularly incensed with me because he 
thought I was aiming the whole rant at him. This was not the case, of 
course, but I can see his point. in the meantime, he and I have 
called a truce, as we both have better things to do.

Dude...
**
At 06:26 AM 2/6/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Dude, you may be the expert on this, and the info you supplied in 
>your response is so good I am saving it, but how about a little 
>respect for everyone on the list. I believe whatever anyone said in 
>an attempt to help they believed to be accurate and helpful. To say 
>and I quote you "Well, I've had enough of this nonsensical babble. 
>None of you seem to understand what you are talking about when it" 
>is a little strong. Life is too short, take a deep breath and enjoy!!
>Rick
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dennis Brunnenmeyer
>Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 2:37 PM
>To: David Creamer; framers@lists.frameusers.com
>Subject: RE: Working with Images
>
>Rant begins...
>
>Well, I've had enough of this nonsensical babble. None of you seem 
>to understand what you are talking about when it comes to dealing 
>with screenshots and raster images, (a.k.a. bitmapped images) as 
>opposed to vector or llne art.
>
>First of all, display devices, whether printers or monitors, have an 
>upper limit on their ability to resolve (print or display) image 
>detail, which by the way is what "resolution" is a measure 
>of...meaningful detail. The best my aging but faithful laser printer 
>can do is 600 dpi, while my uppity LCD monitor can display up to 100 
>dpi, with its1600 x 1200 native resolution on an LCD panel that is 
>exactly 16" wide x 12" tall."  You cannot see nor capture anything 
>and create a screenshot image with higher resolution than the 
>display device. You cannot print anything with higher resolution 
>than the printer can resolve. If you feed a high resolution image to 
>a medium resolution printer, it will interpolate (resample) the 
>image down to medium resolution quality. It has to, as it cannot put 
>all of that information on paper. If you take an very high 
>resolution (total pixel count) image of size 4000 x 3000 pixels (12 
>megapixels) and display the full image it on a monitor like mine, you will
>not see all of detail in the image and hence you will not be able to 
>capture all of the detail in a screenshot.
>
>Most of you seem to appreciate this, but some of you think you can 
>improve resolution by artificial means. No, you cannot.
>
>A true measure of the resolution of an image is the original size of 
>the image in total pixels, assuming it is true to begin with. That 
>is, assuming a perfect digital camera with a perfect lens and the 
>ability to produce a "raw" bitmap (rather than a compressed JPEG 
>file), that 12 megapixel CCD image sensor will produce a significant 
>improvement in the resulting image over a 2 megapixel CCD sensor.
>That image quality is NOT described by either ppi or dpi. It is a 
>function of the number of pixels in the X direction and the number 
>of pixels in the Y direction.
>
>Now the plot thickens when I return to the subject of screenshots, 
>because if I run my graphics card at 1600 x 1200, the type, icons 
>and dialog boxes are uncomfortably small for me to read on the 
>monitor, so I set the graphics card to display its images at 1280 x 960 dpi.
>At this point, the maximum image size that can be displayed without 
>loss of resolution is now 80 ppi. That's 1280 divided by 16.
>[Unfortunately, since the graphics card's resolution doesn't match 
>the native resolution of the LCD panel, the on-screen picture is not 
>as crisp as it could be. This is a result of "aliasing" artifacts, 
>but that's a topic for a different thread.]
>
>Note that in the above paragraph, I switched from dpi for display 
>devices to ppi when describing image size. This is a meature of the 
>physical size of a digital image (as printed or displayed) and 
>should be described in ppi. The ability of a device to display or 
>print an image should be described in dpi, or alternatively, lpi for 
>lines per inch, or pixel spacing, as in 0.25mm. There is a tendency 
>to intermix this terminology and hence confuse the issues you are discussing.
>
>Now that I have set my graphics card to 1280 x 960 for this monitor, 
>the maximum resolution of any image I capture from the screen is 80 
>ppi, regardless of whether I capture a whole screen or just a region 
>of it. If I set the "resolution" of the screen capture program 
>(Snag-It or HyperSnap) to 80 ppi, then the resulting image will be 
>the same physical size as it appeared on the screen, 100%. If I set 
>the capture "resolution" to 160 ppi, then the image will be half the 
>physic

page layout for a double-wide table

[Ben Hechter]

Just curious, has anyone attempted a 2-page master page layout for a lengthy 
double-wide table? Beyond a compressed landscape format, all I can come up with 
at this point is some sort of artificial 11x17 page size, but am stumped 
further...

Thanks for any help,

Ben


Ben Hechter 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.semitake.com
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

page layout for a double-wide table

[Ben Hechter]

Just curious, has anyone attempted a 2-page master page layout for a lengthy 
double-wide table? Beyond a compressed landscape format, all I can come up with 
at this point is some sort of artificial 11x17 page size, but am stumped 
further...

Thanks for any help,

Ben


Ben Hechter 
bhechter at objectives.ca
www.semitake.com

keep with next para

[Combs, Richard]

Stuart Rogers wrote:

> Graeme R Forbes wrote:
> > I have a proof consisting in a sequence of lines across a 
> page, each a 
> > paragraph, and  each line separated from the next by a shallow 
> > anchored frame that contains a separator line. Each 
> line/para is set 
> > to keep with the next one since the whole proof must display on the 
> > same page. However, in order to get one of the lines to fit 
> across the 
> > page, I had to use a soft return, and FM allows the proof to break 
> > across the page at the soft return. Is there some way of preventing 
> > this while retaining the soft return, or will I have to use two 
> > paragraphs?
> > 
> 
> Chiming in late here, but did you ever get a resolution to this?
> 
> I don't fully understand how inserting a soft return caused a 
> single line to fit across the page -- surely that must have 
> resulted in two lines??

I don't understand that either, or the separator lines. But more
fundamentally, if FM is putting in a page break, it's because the entire
proof (all the "keep with next" paragraphs plus whatever follows the
last) *won't fit on one page*. Nothing you do with Keep With and
Widow/Orphan settings will change that. 

If you want to avoid a page break, change the pgfs' space above/below,
the line spacing, the anchored frame -- or, heck, change the height of
the text frame. IOW, do something to make it all fit on one page, and FM
won't try to break it across pages. 

HTH!
Richard


--
Richard G. Combs
Senior Technical Writer
Polycom, Inc.
richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
303-223-5111
--
rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom
303-777-0436
--

Working with Images

[Dennis Brunnenmeyer]

Rick...

You are very correct about my brashness. My apologies to all of you. 
I was anxious to try and squelch some misconceptions and got carried 
away. David Creamer was particularly incensed with me because he 
thought I was aiming the whole rant at him. This was not the case, of 
course, but I can see his point. in the meantime, he and I have 
called a truce, as we both have better things to do.

Dude...
**
At 06:26 AM 2/6/2008, richard.melanson at us.tel.com wrote:
>Dude, you may be the expert on this, and the info you supplied in 
>your response is so good I am saving it, but how about a little 
>respect for everyone on the list. I believe whatever anyone said in 
>an attempt to help they believed to be accurate and helpful. To say 
>and I quote you "Well, I've had enough of this nonsensical babble. 
>None of you seem to understand what you are talking about when it" 
>is a little strong. Life is too short, take a deep breath and enjoy!!
>Rick
>
>-Original Message-
>From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com 
>[mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Dennis 
>Brunnenmeyer
>Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 2:37 PM
>To: David Creamer; framers at lists.frameusers.com
>Subject: RE: Working with Images
>
>Rant begins...
>
>Well, I've had enough of this nonsensical babble. None of you seem 
>to understand what you are talking about when it comes to dealing 
>with screenshots and raster images, (a.k.a. bitmapped images) as 
>opposed to vector or llne art.
>
>First of all, display devices, whether printers or monitors, have an 
>upper limit on their ability to resolve (print or display) image 
>detail, which by the way is what "resolution" is a measure 
>of...meaningful detail. The best my aging but faithful laser printer 
>can do is 600 dpi, while my uppity LCD monitor can display up to 100 
>dpi, with its1600 x 1200 native resolution on an LCD panel that is 
>exactly 16" wide x 12" tall."  You cannot see nor capture anything 
>and create a screenshot image with higher resolution than the 
>display device. You cannot print anything with higher resolution 
>than the printer can resolve. If you feed a high resolution image to 
>a medium resolution printer, it will interpolate (resample) the 
>image down to medium resolution quality. It has to, as it cannot put 
>all of that information on paper. If you take an very high 
>resolution (total pixel count) image of size 4000 x 3000 pixels (12 
>megapixels) and display the full image it on a monitor like mine, you will
>not see all of detail in the image and hence you will not be able to 
>capture all of the detail in a screenshot.
>
>Most of you seem to appreciate this, but some of you think you can 
>improve resolution by artificial means. No, you cannot.
>
>A true measure of the resolution of an image is the original size of 
>the image in total pixels, assuming it is true to begin with. That 
>is, assuming a perfect digital camera with a perfect lens and the 
>ability to produce a "raw" bitmap (rather than a compressed JPEG 
>file), that 12 megapixel CCD image sensor will produce a significant 
>improvement in the resulting image over a 2 megapixel CCD sensor.
>That image quality is NOT described by either ppi or dpi. It is a 
>function of the number of pixels in the X direction and the number 
>of pixels in the Y direction.
>
>Now the plot thickens when I return to the subject of screenshots, 
>because if I run my graphics card at 1600 x 1200, the type, icons 
>and dialog boxes are uncomfortably small for me to read on the 
>monitor, so I set the graphics card to display its images at 1280 x 960 dpi.
>At this point, the maximum image size that can be displayed without 
>loss of resolution is now 80 ppi. That's 1280 divided by 16.
>[Unfortunately, since the graphics card's resolution doesn't match 
>the native resolution of the LCD panel, the on-screen picture is not 
>as crisp as it could be. This is a result of "aliasing" artifacts, 
>but that's a topic for a different thread.]
>
>Note that in the above paragraph, I switched from dpi for display 
>devices to ppi when describing image size. This is a meature of the 
>physical size of a digital image (as printed or displayed) and 
>should be described in ppi. The ability of a device to display or 
>print an image should be described in dpi, or alternatively, lpi for 
>lines per inch, or pixel spacing, as in 0.25mm. There is a tendency 
>to intermix this terminology and hence confuse the issues you are discussing.
>
>Now that I have set my graphics card to 1280 x 960 for this monitor, 
>the maximum resolution of any image I capture from the screen is 80 
>ppi, regardless of whether I capture a whole screen or just a region 
>of it. If I set the "resolution" of the screen capture program 
>(Snag-It or HyperSnap) to 80 ppi, then the resulting image will be 
>the same physical size as it appeared on the screen, 100%. If I set 
>the capture "r

Re: Working with Images

[Peter Gold]

I don't think I've seen a mention about the variation of screen-pixel
size among different monitor brands and models. I realize that
although a screen pixel that's .35mm square, and one that's .25mm
square create different on-screen image sizes and granularity for the
same image, say 100px x 100px, screen-pixel size doesn't affect a
printed image. However, screen-pixel size does affect the appearance
of the size of the original image, and of a PDF of that image.

Isn't it as important to standardize on the screen-pixel size of
monitors in a work flow, just as it is to employ standard screen
calibration, and standard lighting for viewing printed output?

(No rants were harmed during the creation of this question.)

Regards,

Peter
___
Peter Gold
KnowHow ProServices
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Re: Duplicating a two-page section

[Stuart Rogers]

Brewster, Christopher C wrote:
> I'm learning FM as I go, out of necessity. I need to make an alternative
> version of a procedure, so I need a copy of the original appearing just
> after it, which I'll modify. 

Should be dead easy.

The procedure contains a linked graphic.

Makes no difference.

> Simply copying a page didn't work because its contents were inserted
> into another page. 

No clue what you mean here.

So I used Special > Add Disconnected Pages. It's OK
> to be disconnected because each procedure starts at the top of a page.

No, I don't think this is what you want.  Disconnected pages will run 
you into maintenance headaches later on.  You want to keep all your 
pages in a single connected flow, I'm sure.

> The text copied in fine, but the linked graphic needs to appear at the
> top, above the heading. FM won't let me put it there.

Yes it will.  You need to find out what the properties are of the 
anchored frame containing the graphic.  If the anchor is in a text 
paragraph, set the frame's position to Top of Column.  (My preferred way 
to anchor frames is to put them in their own dedicated and otherwise 
empty pgf, which can then have its own position and spacing properties.)

> Any solution to the above appreciated, or just an easier way to copy two
> pages and insert the copy after the original.

Select the material you want to copy and press Ctrl-C; position the 
insertion point where you want the duplicate to appear and press Ctrl-V. 
  Use the Paragraph Designer to set the pagination properties of your 
procedures' first paragraph to Start At Top of Page.

(If you still run into problems, send me your file off list and I'll 
sort it out for you.)

HTH,

-- 
Stuart Rogers
Technical Communicator
Phoenix Geophysics Limited
Toronto, ON, Canada
+1 (416) 491-7340 x 325

srogers phoenix-geophysics com

If it makes things work more easily, why isn't it called lubrican?
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Re: Working with Images

[Stuart Rogers]

John Sgammato wrote:
> ...

> Note that with SnagIt you can opt to capture the image at other
> resolutions, so you need not change anything in FM. I capture images
> as 200dpi TIFFs, and then import them at 200dpi in my books. I go to
> print, PDF, and online help from a single set of screenshots.

John, your workflow is appropriate, but you're not quite correct on why.

You are not capturing the image "at other resolutions," or really at any 
resolution.  You are capturing a specific number of pixels.  At the time 
of capture, they are *displayed* at your screen resolution (pixels per 
inch, ppi; not dpi).  Put that captured image on another screen with 
different graphics card resolution, and the identical number of pixels 
will be displayed on that screen, with different physical dimensions 
because that screen positions the pixels closer or farther apart 
(different number of ppi).  None of that matters when it comes to 
putting the image in FM.

When you tell SnagIt or FM or Photoshop or any other program that an 
image is xxx dpi, you are simply giving it an instruction to pass along 
to the print device that it should place the dots 1/xxx inch apart.  If 
you tell SnagIt you want the image to be 200 dpi, it tells FM the same 
thing; when you import "at 200dpi", you're telling FM the same thing. 
FM renders an approximation of that on screen, as well as passing the 
instruction on to the print driver.  The image that you captured, unless 
manipulated by some sort of interpolation, can only contain the number 
of pixels that formed the original object on screen.  Telling SnagIt 
200dpi or 50dpi does not change the number of pixels or the size of the 
file; it only changes the distance between dots when printed (and the 
size of FM's on-screen approximation).

Best regards,

-- 
Stuart Rogers
Technical Communicator
Phoenix Geophysics Limited
Toronto, ON, Canada
+1 (416) 491-7340 x 325

srogers phoenix-geophysics com

If it makes things work more easily, why isn't it called lubrican?
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: keep with next para

[Combs, Richard]

Stuart Rogers wrote:
 
> Graeme R Forbes wrote:
> > I have a proof consisting in a sequence of lines across a 
> page, each a 
> > paragraph, and  each line separated from the next by a shallow 
> > anchored frame that contains a separator line. Each 
> line/para is set 
> > to keep with the next one since the whole proof must display on the 
> > same page. However, in order to get one of the lines to fit 
> across the 
> > page, I had to use a soft return, and FM allows the proof to break 
> > across the page at the soft return. Is there some way of preventing 
> > this while retaining the soft return, or will I have to use two 
> > paragraphs?
> > 
> 
> Chiming in late here, but did you ever get a resolution to this?
> 
> I don't fully understand how inserting a soft return caused a 
> single line to fit across the page -- surely that must have 
> resulted in two lines??

I don't understand that either, or the separator lines. But more
fundamentally, if FM is putting in a page break, it's because the entire
proof (all the "keep with next" paragraphs plus whatever follows the
last) *won't fit on one page*. Nothing you do with Keep With and
Widow/Orphan settings will change that. 

If you want to avoid a page break, change the pgfs' space above/below,
the line spacing, the anchored frame -- or, heck, change the height of
the text frame. IOW, do something to make it all fit on one page, and FM
won't try to break it across pages. 

HTH!
Richard


--
Richard G. Combs
Senior Technical Writer
Polycom, Inc.
richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
303-223-5111
--
rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom
303-777-0436
--




___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Re: keep with next para

[Stuart Rogers]

Graeme R Forbes wrote:
> I have a proof consisting in a sequence of lines across a page, each 
> a paragraph, and  each line separated from the next by a shallow 
> anchored frame that contains a separator line. Each line/para is set 
> to keep with the next one since the whole proof must display on the 
> same page. However, in order to get one of the lines to fit across 
> the page, I had to use a soft return, and FM allows the proof to 
> break across the page at the soft return. Is there some way of 
> preventing this while retaining the soft return, or will I have to 
> use two paragraphs?
> 

Chiming in late here, but did you ever get a resolution to this?

I don't fully understand how inserting a soft return caused a single 
line to fit across the page -- surely that must have resulted in two lines??

At any rate, I would use the Frame Below property to add the separator 
line, and I would specify a large number of Widow/Orphan lines on the 
pagination tab.  My test document in FM 7.0 does not break a pgf at a 
soft return with Orphans set to 5, so I think that would work with your 
  one or two line situation.

HTH,

-- 
Stuart Rogers
Technical Communicator
Phoenix Geophysics Limited
Toronto, ON, Canada
+1 (416) 491-7340 x 325

srogers phoenix-geophysics com

If it makes things work more easily, why isn't it called lubrican?
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: Working with Images

[Dennis Brunnenmeyer]

David...

This was not an attack on you. Please see my remarks embedded below.

Dennis...

At 02:07 PM 2/5/2008, you wrote:
>On Dennis Brunnenmeyer at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 2/5/08 11:36
>AM:
>
> > Rant begins...
> > 
> >
> > First of all, display devices, whether printers or monitors, have an upper
> > limit on their ability to resolve (print or display) image detail, which by
> > the way is what "resolution" is a measure of...meaningful detail. 
> The best my
> > aging but faithful laser printer can do is 600 dpi, while my uppity LCD
> > monitor can display up to 100 dpi, with its1600 x 1200 native 
> resolution on an
> > LCD panel that is exactly 16" wide x 12" tall."
>You are totally ignoring line screen (aka LPI) when printing. Using the
>formula will determine the quality of the output on a black-only laser
>printer:
>(Output Resolution/Screen Frequency)^2 [squared] +1 = total number of gray
>levels available to the printer.
>So a 600dpi printer at 100 LPI gives you only 37 levels of gray. For photos,
>you need around 200 levels of gray to look natural.
>
>For commercial offset printing, one should use the following guideline:
>PPI= LPI x 1.5. (Some use LPI x 2, but 1.5 is normally enough.)

I was referring to true image resolution. By resampling to a higher 
pixel-squared number, you have not increased the resolution of the 
image. No new detail is revealed that wasn't there before. However, I 
will grant that you may *enhance* the appearance when printing in 
this manner by falsifying the image to a degree.


> > You cannot see nor capture
> > anything and create a screenshot image with higher resolution 
> than the display
> > device..
>I think I said something similar to that.

I think you're probably right about that. However, several people 
have implied, that capturing a screen image at, say, 160 ppi gives 
more detail. This cannot be if the display resolution is set to 80 or 
100 dpi. The end result is that the same number of pixels are 
captured but with a higher ppi value, meaning as you have pointed out 
that the image is "physically" smaller.


> >
> > Most of you seem to appreciate this, but some of you think you can improve
> > resolution by artificial means. No, you cannot.
>I think I said something similar to that.

No, you said this: "One can, however, add extra resolution to the 
image, but that is usually detrimental
to the quality of the image."

Only the last half of this sentence is correct.

> >
> > A true measure of the resolution of an image is the original size 
> of the image
> > in total pixels, assuming it is true to begin with.
>I think I said something similar to that.

No reasonable person could disagree with that, and I think you are 
reasonable enough to have said that. Of course, in the case of color 
images, color depth counts too.


> >[Unfortunately, since the graphics card's resolution doesn't
> > match the native resolution of the LCD panel, the on-screen 
> picture is not as
> > crisp as it could be. This is a result of "aliasing" artifacts, 
> but that's a
> > topic for a different thread.]
>I believe you are confusing what you see on screen to what is actually being
>captured.

Actually, I'm not. The artifacts I see due to pixel aliasing on the 
screen are just annoying visual impairments specific to the display 
technology and not an indication of the quality of the image itself.

> >
> >
> >. If I set the capture "resolution" to 160 ppi, then the
> > image will be half the physical size as it appeared on the 
> screen, BUT IT WILL
> > HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME NUMBER OF PIXELS. The resolution has not be 
> improved, as
> > no more detail has been added.
>I think I said something similar to that.

Yes, you did and you are correct.

> >
> > No new detail nor
> > image improvement can be added by interpolation.
>I think I said something similar to that.
>However, I suspect you have not used nearest neighbor interpolation too
>much.

"Improvement" in the sense that I meant it was intended to convey an 
improvement in actual accuracy. As you pointed out above, you can 
"enhance" some images this way by interpolating in new gray-scale or 
color values to yield a prettier but partially-false result. But you 
would NOT want to interpolate using any methodology in order to 
"enhance" a screen shot of a Windows dialog box. For the same reason, 
one should not save those kinds of screen shots as JPEG images.


> >
> > I have no idea what David meant by this statement:  "Again, referring to my
> > last post, monitor resolution only counts if
> > capturing an entire screen."
>I thought it was pretty clear. 1280x1040 is the same amount to X/Y pixel
>data on a 17 inch monitor, a 19 inch monitor, or a 20 inch monitor.

That's very true, but that's irrelevant to what I quoted above. Your 
sentence makes no sense.

> >
> > Flame away...
>I try not to flame or rant as I think it dilutes t

Working with Images

[richard.melan...@us.tel.com]

Dude, you may be the expert on this, and the info you supplied in your response 
is so good I am saving it, but how about a little respect for everyone on the 
list. I believe whatever anyone said in an attempt to help they believed to be 
accurate and helpful. To say and I quote you "Well, I've had enough of this 
nonsensical babble. None of you seem to understand what you are talking about 
when it" is a little strong. Life is too short, take a deep breath and enjoy!!
Rick

-Original Message-
From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com 
[mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Brunnenmeyer
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 2:37 PM
To: David Creamer; framers at lists.frameusers.com
Subject: RE: Working with Images

Rant begins...

Well, I've had enough of this nonsensical babble. None of you seem to 
understand what you are talking about when it comes to dealing with screenshots 
and raster images, (a.k.a. bitmapped images) as opposed to vector or llne art.

First of all, display devices, whether printers or monitors, have an upper 
limit on their ability to resolve (print or display) image detail, which by the 
way is what "resolution" is a measure of...meaningful detail. The best my aging 
but faithful laser printer can do is 600 dpi, while my uppity LCD monitor can 
display up to 100 dpi, with its1600 x 1200 native resolution on an LCD panel 
that is exactly 16" wide x 12" tall."  You cannot see nor capture anything and 
create a screenshot image with higher resolution than the display device. You 
cannot print anything with higher resolution than the printer can resolve. If 
you feed a high resolution image to a medium resolution printer, it will 
interpolate (resample) the image down to medium resolution quality. It has to, 
as it cannot put all of that information on paper. If you take an very high 
resolution (total pixel count) image of size 4000 x 3000 pixels (12 megapixels) 
and display the full image it on a monitor like mine, you will
not see all of detail in the image and hence you will not be able to capture 
all of the detail in a screenshot.

Most of you seem to appreciate this, but some of you think you can improve 
resolution by artificial means. No, you cannot.

A true measure of the resolution of an image is the original size of the image 
in total pixels, assuming it is true to begin with. That is, assuming a perfect 
digital camera with a perfect lens and the ability to produce a "raw" bitmap 
(rather than a compressed JPEG file), that 12 megapixel CCD image sensor will 
produce a significant improvement in the resulting image over a 2 megapixel CCD 
sensor. 
That image quality is NOT described by either ppi or dpi. It is a function of 
the number of pixels in the X direction and the number of pixels in the Y 
direction.

Now the plot thickens when I return to the subject of screenshots, because if I 
run my graphics card at 1600 x 1200, the type, icons and dialog boxes are 
uncomfortably small for me to read on the monitor, so I set the graphics card 
to display its images at 1280 x 960 dpi. 
At this point, the maximum image size that can be displayed without loss of 
resolution is now 80 ppi. That's 1280 divided by 16. 
[Unfortunately, since the graphics card's resolution doesn't match the native 
resolution of the LCD panel, the on-screen picture is not as crisp as it could 
be. This is a result of "aliasing" artifacts, but that's a topic for a 
different thread.]

Note that in the above paragraph, I switched from dpi for display devices to 
ppi when describing image size. This is a meature of the physical size of a 
digital image (as printed or displayed) and should be described in ppi. The 
ability of a device to display or print an image should be described in dpi, or 
alternatively, lpi for lines per inch, or pixel spacing, as in 0.25mm. There is 
a tendency to intermix this terminology and hence confuse the issues you are 
discussing.

Now that I have set my graphics card to 1280 x 960 for this monitor, the 
maximum resolution of any image I capture from the screen is 80 ppi, regardless 
of whether I capture a whole screen or just a region of it. If I set the 
"resolution" of the screen capture program (Snag-It or HyperSnap) to 80 ppi, 
then the resulting image will be the same physical size as it appeared on the 
screen, 100%. If I set the capture "resolution" to 160 ppi, then the image will 
be half the physical size as it appeared on the screen, BUT IT WILL HAVE 
EXACTLY THE SAME NUMBER OF PIXELS. The resolution has not be improved, as no 
more detail has been added.

Upsampling and/or downsampling using any kind of pixel resampling (a.k.a. 
interpolation), whether bicubic or otherwise, ALWAYS removes detail from the 
image. In either case, new pixels are created that are some kind of average of 
the original ones. They're guesses at what shoud be there at that point in the 
image, and not real information that wasn't there before. No new 

RE: Working with Images

[richard.melanson]

Dude, you may be the expert on this, and the info you supplied in your response 
is so good I am saving it, but how about a little respect for everyone on the 
list. I believe whatever anyone said in an attempt to help they believed to be 
accurate and helpful. To say and I quote you "Well, I've had enough of this 
nonsensical babble. None of you seem to understand what you are talking about 
when it" is a little strong. Life is too short, take a deep breath and enjoy!!
Rick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dennis 
Brunnenmeyer
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 2:37 PM
To: David Creamer; framers@lists.frameusers.com
Subject: RE: Working with Images

Rant begins...

Well, I've had enough of this nonsensical babble. None of you seem to 
understand what you are talking about when it comes to dealing with screenshots 
and raster images, (a.k.a. bitmapped images) as opposed to vector or llne art.

First of all, display devices, whether printers or monitors, have an upper 
limit on their ability to resolve (print or display) image detail, which by the 
way is what "resolution" is a measure of...meaningful detail. The best my aging 
but faithful laser printer can do is 600 dpi, while my uppity LCD monitor can 
display up to 100 dpi, with its1600 x 1200 native resolution on an LCD panel 
that is exactly 16" wide x 12" tall."  You cannot see nor capture anything and 
create a screenshot image with higher resolution than the display device. You 
cannot print anything with higher resolution than the printer can resolve. If 
you feed a high resolution image to a medium resolution printer, it will 
interpolate (resample) the image down to medium resolution quality. It has to, 
as it cannot put all of that information on paper. If you take an very high 
resolution (total pixel count) image of size 4000 x 3000 pixels (12 megapixels) 
and display the full image it on a monitor like mine, you
  will
not see all of detail in the image and hence you will not be able to capture 
all of the detail in a screenshot.

Most of you seem to appreciate this, but some of you think you can improve 
resolution by artificial means. No, you cannot.

A true measure of the resolution of an image is the original size of the image 
in total pixels, assuming it is true to begin with. That is, assuming a perfect 
digital camera with a perfect lens and the ability to produce a "raw" bitmap 
(rather than a compressed JPEG file), that 12 megapixel CCD image sensor will 
produce a significant improvement in the resulting image over a 2 megapixel CCD 
sensor. 
That image quality is NOT described by either ppi or dpi. It is a function of 
the number of pixels in the X direction and the number of pixels in the Y 
direction.

Now the plot thickens when I return to the subject of screenshots, because if I 
run my graphics card at 1600 x 1200, the type, icons and dialog boxes are 
uncomfortably small for me to read on the monitor, so I set the graphics card 
to display its images at 1280 x 960 dpi. 
At this point, the maximum image size that can be displayed without loss of 
resolution is now 80 ppi. That's 1280 divided by 16. 
[Unfortunately, since the graphics card's resolution doesn't match the native 
resolution of the LCD panel, the on-screen picture is not as crisp as it could 
be. This is a result of "aliasing" artifacts, but that's a topic for a 
different thread.]

Note that in the above paragraph, I switched from dpi for display devices to 
ppi when describing image size. This is a meature of the physical size of a 
digital image (as printed or displayed) and should be described in ppi. The 
ability of a device to display or print an image should be described in dpi, or 
alternatively, lpi for lines per inch, or pixel spacing, as in 0.25mm. There is 
a tendency to intermix this terminology and hence confuse the issues you are 
discussing.

Now that I have set my graphics card to 1280 x 960 for this monitor, the 
maximum resolution of any image I capture from the screen is 80 ppi, regardless 
of whether I capture a whole screen or just a region of it. If I set the 
"resolution" of the screen capture program (Snag-It or HyperSnap) to 80 ppi, 
then the resulting image will be the same physical size as it appeared on the 
screen, 100%. If I set the capture "resolution" to 160 ppi, then the image will 
be half the physical size as it appeared on the screen, BUT IT WILL HAVE 
EXACTLY THE SAME NUMBER OF PIXELS. The resolution has not be improved, as no 
more detail has been added.

Upsampling and/or downsampling using any kind of pixel resampling (a.k.a. 
interpolation), whether bicubic or otherwise, ALWAYS removes detail from the 
image. In either case, new pixels are created that are some kind of average of 
the original ones. They're guesses at what shoud be there at that point in the 
image, and not real information that wasn't there before. No new detail nor 
image improvement can be added 

Re: Revising Help topics created in WebWorks

[Yves Barbion]

Hi Rebecca,

if you only need to change the text in the footer, the easiest (and 
cheapest) way is to open all the HTML files in a plain text editor and 
do a global search and replace there. For example, you could use EditPad 
Lite for this: http://www.editpadpro.com/editpadlite.html

Thus, you don't have to upgrade WebWorks (or FrameMaker).

Good luck.

Yves Barbion 
Documentation Architect
Adobe-Certified FrameMaker Instructor


Scripto bvba
Asselsstraat 65
9031 Gent
Belgium
T: +32 494 12 01 89
F: +32 9 366 50 23
BTW (VAT) BE 0886.192.394
skype: yves.barbion




Rebecca Martin wrote:
> I have a legacy Help project that was created in Frame7.1 and published via
> Webworks Publisher 2003 for FrameMaker. We need to make changes to the
> footer in every topic, but have been unable to find the project file for
> editing. I was told we should make the changes in Frame and republish the
> help with Webworks. Unfortunately, it looks like we cannot make changes to
> the current project unless we use the WebWorks Publisher Professional
> Edition 7.0. (That would require us to upgrade, but we're not sure the
> current version of FM would work with it.)
>
>  
>
> Is that a correct assumption?
>
>  
>
> Is there a project file we should be looking for? We have found .wdt and
> .wfp files, none of which open the project.
>
>  
>
> Any advice on how to proceed?
>
>  
>
> Rebecca R. Martin
>
> Professional Services Manager
>
> Radcom, Inc.
>
> 1696 Georgetown Rd., Unit A
>
> Hudson, OH 44236
>
> 330-650-4777, X 109
>
> www.radcomservices.com
>
>  
>
> ___
>
>
> You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> or visit 
> http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/yves.barbion%40gmail.com
>
> Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
> http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
>
>   
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Internal Error

[Shmuel Wolfson]

I occasionally have the dreaded "Internal Error" after a search in FM, 
then FM closes. Would extra RAM help? I have 1 GB of RAM now.

-- 
Regards,
Shmuel Wolfson


___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.