Embedded TIFs vs. JPGs

[susiew32]

Our marketing department uses Publisher for our many many project proposals.
We have Publisher documents saved that are used as ‘templates’ for the
proposals we create – start from a template and add to that any information
needed for the current proposal.

The template files have a lot of embedded images which are TIF files. As we
add pages to these files, they are become very large (200 MB sometimes) that
modifying them in Publisher is becoming a chore and performance is poor.

Linking the images is not an option.

My questions: If we replace the TIF files with JPG files:

1) The files will surely be smaller, but will the performance improve?

2) JPGs are known to lose their clarity over time, where TIFs are lossless.
If we put the JPG into a document and leave it there, will the fact that it
is lossy make a difference if we aren’t modifying the image at all? What if
we make copies of the Publisher document over and over again? Will that make
a difference to the clarity of the picture?

We don’t want to change the TIFs to JPGs and then realize down the line that
our images are not sharp.

Thanks so much in advance.

 

[Uncle Grumpy]

My questions: If we replace the TIF files with JPG files:

1) The files will surely be smaller, but will the performance improve?
Possibly.

2) JPGs are known to lose their clarity over time, where TIFs are lossless.
If we put the JPG into a document and leave it there, will the fact that it
is lossy make a difference if we aren’t modifying the image at all?

Nope. The loss comes with frequent changes to the image, not to
viewing it.

What if we make copies of the Publisher document over and over again?
Will that make difference to the clarity of the picture?
Nope.

We don’t want to change the TIFs to JPGs and then realize down the line that
our images are not sharp.

If you plan to print your documents, then you will probably have to
upgrade them to 300dpi or better, but otherwise you should be OK.

 

[Rob Giordano \(Crash\)]

resize your images prior to inserting them in Pub
tiffs are lossless
jpgs are lossy but NOT by just looking at or using them, only by opening and
changing then resaving, etc.

try it with resized jpgs at 300 dpi - but keep your original tiffs and
you'll be fine.



--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rob Giordano
Microsoft MVP Expression





| Our marketing department uses Publisher for our many many project
proposals.
| We have Publisher documents saved that are used as 'templates' for the
| proposals we create - start from a template and add to that any
information
| needed for the current proposal.
|
| The template files have a lot of embedded images which are TIF files. As
we
| add pages to these files, they are become very large (200 MB sometimes)
that
| modifying them in Publisher is becoming a chore and performance is poor.
|
| Linking the images is not an option.
|
| My questions: If we replace the TIF files with JPG files:
|
| 1) The files will surely be smaller, but will the performance improve?
|
| 2) JPGs are known to lose their clarity over time, where TIFs are
lossless.
| If we put the JPG into a document and leave it there, will the fact that
it
| is lossy make a difference if we aren't modifying the image at all? What
if
| we make copies of the Publisher document over and over again? Will that
make
| a difference to the clarity of the picture?
|
| We don't want to change the TIFs to JPGs and then realize down the line
that
| our images are not sharp.
|
| Thanks so much in advance.
|

 

[Matt Beals]

Because of how Publisher works (it tries to do you a lot of "favors")
you should always scale your images to their final size (within a few
percent) in PhotoShop and save them as an EPS.

TIFF's are good, very good. But... Publisher will do things to them that
you don't necessarily know about or even want it to do. Like convert
them to RGB (sRGB) even if they were CMYK or Adobe RGB. Image down
sampling may occur. Yes, they are typically larger than JPEG's. And for
good reason! They don't use "lossy" compression. They use ZIP, LZW or
none. Lossy compression (JPEG, JPEG2000) actually deletes image data it
(the algorithm) doesn't think is necessary. Every time a JPEG is saved
it goes back through this progress. And eventually you end up with
something **really** horrible. That's how JPEG's can get so small. One,
two or three iterations saving with "high" or "maximum" quality probably
will not adversely affect image quality. Where as TIFF uses "lossless"
compression. It is akin to "zipping" a file for emailing. All image data
is preserved but is compressed as much as practically possible. TIFF can
contain, black and white, grayscale, RGB, LAB and CMYK colors. But
Publisher can (and will try to) convert them to RGB since that's the
color space Publisher works in (sRGB to be exact).

JPEG's can be good if they are saved using "maximum quality" or levels
8-12. See TIFF's above for other problems. JPEG (and JPEG2000) can
contain grayscale, RGB, and CMYK. Not sure about LAB...

EPS's can contain JPEG compressed image data but suffers from JPEG
compression problems. They can contain grayscale, RGB and CMYK spaces as
well as spot colors. This makes them the most flexible. And you have the
added bonus of Publisher ***NOT*** being able to convert them to RGB.

If you have to use external images (links if you will) with Publisher,
DO NOT EMBED THEM if you are sending to a commercial printer. Use the
Pack and Go feature... If you are doing things for home or small
projects that will not end up on a printing press then embedding them is
fine. Just remember, if the image gets corrupted and it is embedded then
the whole document may crash and be lost. If it is linked then the rest
of the publication can still be saved. Same thing goes for fonts. DON'T
EMBED THEM, use Pack and Go.

EPS: Best
TIFF: Next best
JPEG: Only if you have to...

Matt Beals
Consultant
Enfocus Certified Trainer
Markzware Recognized Trainer
(206) 201-2320 - Main
(720) 367-3869 - eFax
mailto:[email protected]

Come visit me at:

http://www.automatetheworkflow.com
http://www.mattbeals.com
http://forums.mattbeals.com

Friends don't let friends write HTML email

 

[Matt Beals]

Yes, it is entirely possible. Programs are much better about this now.
It's not like PageMaker used to be. The more common problem wasn't the
document being lost. Generally it was that the image would crash during
printing and therefore crash the application. Which then meant that we
had to scour the documents for images and diagnose each individual one
to see which one (or more) were the problems. Copy & Paste images were
particularly difficult. So for the last 18 years in my experience:
Embedding bad, linking good. I still do that to this very day. I embed
**NOTHING** in documents except for text. And even then I will usually
link the text.

"Screw me once, shame on you. Screw me twice, shame on me."

Matt Beals
Consultant
Enfocus Certified Trainer
Markzware Recognized Trainer
(206) 201-2320 - Main
(720) 367-3869 - eFax
mailto:[email protected]

Come visit me at:

http://www.automatetheworkflow.com
http://www.mattbeals.com
http://forums.mattbeals.com

Friends don't let friends write HTML email

 

[susiew32]

Thanks all so much for all your input. We will try to set up a document with
embedded jpgs and see if the performance improves.

 

[Matt Beals]

Don't embed... Think "L I N K".

Matt Beals
Consultant
Enfocus Certified Trainer
Markzware Recognized Trainer
(206) 201-2320 - Main
(720) 367-3869 - eFax
mailto:[email protected]

Come visit me at:

http://www.automatetheworkflow.com
http://www.mattbeals.com
http://forums.mattbeals.com

Friends don't let friends write HTML email