Graphics in Word

[Charlie_Bucket]

Version: 2008
Operating System: Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard)
Processor: Intel

I have written my family history and want to include photos in the document. Unfortunately this makes the file much too large. So I will instead link the graphics to the document.
My first question is: What happens when I want to convert the document to a PDF using Acrobat or whatever- do the graphics first have to be embedded into Word or can they be converted separately?
Secondly, I have read that, with later versions of Word, graphics are changed or degraded by Word. These effects include downsampling,reduction of bit depth and antialiasing and can happen when the graphics are inserted or when the document is saved or when it is converted to a PDF using Word.
Is this a major concern? Thanks.

 

[macropod]

Hi Charlie,

Neither linking nor embedding a picture has any 'degradation' effect in Word. Saving the file as a web page (HTML) can do, as the
images are resampled to suit web page display.

Saving a file as a PDF may 'degrade' the image but, since i'ts being resampled to suit printer resolution (which is far higher than
monitor resolution), this is unlikely to be noticeable. The only noticeable effect might be a reduction in the overall file size.

 

[Charlie_Bucket]

I have just read a reply to another question that states that Word 2008 does not resample images whereas earlier versions do. What I read, as mentioned in my second question above, refers to 2004 and 2007. So I am now reasonably happy that my pictures are being properly looked after by Word 2008.
But what about my first question? My document will be too big with photos embedded. Should I link the pictures or break it up into a number of files? With either, could I then convert it or them into one PDF?

 

[CyberTaz]

Hello Charlie -

The first question you have to ask yourself is "Do I intend to have the
finished product printed commercially?" If the answer even approximates a
"No" it's best to avoid using high resolution images in the first place.
Where most people make their mistake is snapping shots with their
multi-megapixel cameras & dumping the images right straight into a document.

For best results the images should be rendered by way of a decent graphics
editor to the appropriate print size, resolution & color mode before
inserting them into the doc - regardless of whether you Link or Embed.

The manner in which the project will be reproduced determines what the
resolution needs to be. For anything less that commercial press it need not
be any higher than 300 ppi - more than that is simply bloat, regardless of
whether that bloat is carried within the file (embedded) or toted along with
it (Linked). If the intended output is for web display 96 ppi is quite
sufficient and a PDF distributed via the web need be no more than 120 ppi.

Using those resolution guidelines even properly done 24 bit TIFF images
(more than adequate for quality printing) will render much smaller & add
less bulk even if embedded. However, TIFFs are only "necessary" if the color
mode needs to be CMYK - again, for commercial output. (Despite what the mfrs
& vendors lead you to believe, the overwhelming majority of desktop printers
*do not* print CMYK, regardless of how many ink cartridges they have or what
colors they're labeled as .) JPEGs would be significantly smaller still &
quite acceptable for non-commercial printing.

Keep in mind also that linked images must accompany the document in order to
be available when printing takes place. Otherwise it's only a low-res
display thumbnail that is used fro printing. IOW, The primary advantage of
linking is to keep the *working* size of the file smaller so the images
don't hamper the speed of editing & navigating during revision of the
document.

HTH |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[macropod]

Hi Charlie,

The only re-sampling previous versions of Word did was to convert non-jpg/png images to jpg or png for internal storage. This has no
effect on the image resolution, though. AFAIK, Word 2007 & 2008 are no different in that regard.

Whether you link or embed should make little or no difference to the PDF, in terms of file size or image resolution. It might make a
difference to Word's performance if the images being linked to are in a non-jpg/png format, since Word has to convert them before it
can display them. If the images are embedded, they'll already have been converted.

 

[Daiya Mitchell]

Version: 2008
Operating System: Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard)
Processor: Intel

I have written my family history and want to include photos in the document. Unfortunately this makes the file much too large. So I will instead link the graphics to the document.

I have to say, for a serious family history, I would really investigate
the various Mac genealogy software that's out there. If you intend to
add, continue, etc, I just feel specialized software will make your life
much easier in terms of tracking the family, and I'm sure that some of
the programs will let you link pictures and output to print, CD, etc.

I'm planning to do my non-serious family tree in iPhoto, personally, but
it won't have any history.

But since you've already written it in Word (sounds like), see
CyberTaz's reply. Experiment with putting resized photos in a separate
few pages and then test your PDF or printing or whatever you plan the
end result to be, so you can sort the issues before doing all the work.

 

[Charlie_Bucket]

Thank you macropod, CyberTaz and Daiya. You have supplied a lot of information and useful advice which I will now digest.
I appreciate the time and effort you have put into your answers.

Regards, Charlie.